<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Union Pacific Railroad called the decision by federal regulators to rule its filing as “incomplete” a minor setback that won’t significantly change the timeline for its hoped-for acquisition of NS.</div>

Union Pacific Railroad called the decision by federal regulators to rule its filing as “incomplete” a minor setback that won’t significantly change the timeline for its hoped-for acquisition of NS.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific Railroad said Tuesday it is moving quickly to address deficiencies that led federal regulators to deem its application to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway “incomplete,” and expects to refile an updated application within “weeks.” Once UP resubmits its application, the regulatory process will restart with a fresh 30-day review period during which the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) will determine whether the new filing is complete. Interested parties may file comments during that period, and UP and NS can respond.  “We are disappointed that the STB determined we needed to provide more information after providing close to 7,000 pages,” UP CEO Jim Vena said during the railroad’s fourth-quarter earnings call Tuesday. “Our response will take a few weeks to prepare and then we will refile our application as soon as possible.  “We view this as a short-term blip and do not expect a significant change to the timeline as we are still targeting closing in the first half of 2027,” he added. Although UP did not provide a specific refiling date, Vena said the company would announce the timing in a subsequent public statement and that a revised application could be sent to the STB in March. The <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/stb-rejects-up-ns-merger-application-as-incomplete-6154074">STB determined that UP failed to provide</a> sufficient information on future growth, citing inconsistencies in baseline assumptions across different sections of its application. Opponents of the $85 billion deal have also argued that Union Pacific’s projections, including removing 2 million truckloads from highways in large part through 1.17 million truckload-to-intermodal conversions within three years, are overly optimistic. Vena said long-haul intermodal routes exceeding 2,000 miles historically have lower rail market share because shippers are reluctant to accept handoffs between railroads in hubs such as Chicago. Under a combined Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern network, he said, market share would more closely resemble that of 1,000- to 1,500-mile lanes, where rail penetration is higher because a single railroad handles the entire move. Other railroads have argued that handling that volume would require UP to operate as many as 15 additional trains per day, potentially congesting the network. UP said it would not degrade overall service. “This morning, we have over 2,000 movements, foreign railroads, and local trains running on our network,” Vena said on the earnings call. “If we add 10 or 15 more trains a day, it's a pretty small rounding error on the impact for the network.”  UP also addressed the STB’s objection to the railroad’s failure to disclose a document known as Schedule 5.6, which outlines conditions under which the company could walk away from the transaction.  “I don't like it because I don't think it adds to the merits, but guess what? I wish Jim Vena had a totalitarian system that I could get every decision that I want, but I don't even get it at home with my wife and kids, let alone with the regulator,” Vena said. <h3>Not banking on economic turnaround this year </h3>While there were few non-merger-related questions on Tuesday’s call, Union Pacific did offer a cautious economic outlook for 2026, acknowledging that pricing gains across its businesses will be difficult to achieve.  “S&amp;P Global's 2026 economic estimates in key areas such as industrial production, housing starts and auto sales have deteriorated,” said Jennifer Hanneman, UP’s chief financial officer. “In addition, rail inflation is ticking up again. We expect slightly over 4% inflation in . Our commitment to yielding price dollars that exceed inflation dollars has not changed, but price may not be a driver of our improving margins in 2026.” S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. UP said 2026 is likely to be challenging for international intermodal traffic, with port volumes expected to decline year over year through at least the first half. The railroad said it remains bullish on domestic intermodal, which set volume records in 2025, though it did not provide a specific forecast. Union Pacific took market share from rival BNSF Railway in California during the second half of last year, according to data visibility platform , while also winning freight from the truckload market. “We’ve had over-the-road wins with Uber Freight, over-the-road wins in Phoenix, wins in Kansas City,” Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president of sales and marketing, said on the call. “So we're coming from a position of strength and we're excited about it.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a> </div>

Union Pacific Railroad said Tuesday it is moving quickly to address deficiencies that led federal regulators to deem its application to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway “incomplete,” and expects to refile an updated application within “weeks.”  Once UP resubmits its application, the regulatory process will restart with a fresh 30-day review period during which the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) will determine whether the new filing is complete. Interested parties may file comments during that period, and UP and NS can respond.   “We are disappointed that the STB determined we needed to provide more information after providing close to 7,000 pages,” UP CEO Jim Vena said during the railroad’s fourth-quarter earnings call Tuesday. “Our response will take a few weeks to prepare and then we will refile our application as soon as possible.   “We view this as a short-term blip and do not expect a significant change to the timeline as we are still targeting closing in the first half of 2027,” he added.  Although UP did not provide a specific refiling date, Vena said the company would announce the timing in a subsequent public statement and that a revised application could be sent to the STB in March.  The  STB determined that UP failed to provide  sufficient information on future growth, citing inconsistencies in baseline assumptions across different sections of its application. Opponents of the $85 billion deal have also argued that Union Pacific’s projections, including removing 2 million truckloads from highways in large part through 1.17 million truckload-to-intermodal conversions within three years, are overly optimistic.  Vena said long-haul intermodal routes exceeding 2,000 miles historically have lower rail market share because shippers are reluctant to accept handoffs between railroads in hubs such as Chicago. Under a combined Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern network, he said, market share would more closely resemble that of 1,000- to 1,500-mile lanes, where rail penetration is higher because a single railroad handles the entire move.  Other railroads have argued that handling that volume would require UP to operate as many as 15 additional trains per day, potentially congesting the network. UP said it would not degrade overall service.  “This morning, we have over 2,000 movements, foreign railroads, and local trains running on our network,” Vena said on the earnings call. “If we add 10 or 15 more trains a day, it's a pretty small rounding error on the impact for the network.”   UP also addressed the STB’s objection to the railroad’s failure to disclose a document known as Schedule 5.6, which outlines conditions under which the company could walk away from the transaction.   “I don't like it because I don't think it adds to the merits, but guess what? I wish Jim Vena had a totalitarian system that I could get every decision that I want, but I don't even get it at home with my wife and kids, let alone with the regulator,” Vena said.  Not banking on economic turnaround this year  While there were few non-merger-related questions on Tuesday’s call, Union Pacific did offer a cautious economic outlook for 2026, acknowledging that pricing gains across its businesses will be difficult to achieve.   “S&P Global's 2026 economic estimates in key areas such as industrial production, housing starts and auto sales have deteriorated,” said Jennifer Hanneman, UP’s chief financial officer. “In addition, rail inflation is ticking up again. We expect slightly over 4% inflation in . Our commitment to yielding price dollars that exceed inflation dollars has not changed, but price may not be a driver of our improving margins in 2026.”  S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.  UP said 2026 is likely to be challenging for international intermodal traffic, with port volumes expected to decline year over year through at least the first half. The railroad said it remains bullish on domestic intermodal, which set volume records in 2025, though it did not provide a specific forecast.  Union Pacific took market share from rival BNSF Railway in California during the second half of last year, according to data visibility platform , while also winning freight from the truckload market.  “We’ve had over-the-road wins with Uber Freight, over-the-road wins in Phoenix, wins in Kansas City,” Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president of sales and marketing, said on the call. “So we're coming from a position of strength and we're excited about it.”  Contact Ari Ashe at  ari.ashe@spglobal.com  

Rail News

North-American rail

Revised Norfolk Southern merger application will be refiled in ‘weeks’: UP

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">“Lumpy” project cargo demand is expected to lead to overutilization of the global multipurpose vessel fleet, participants in a Journal of Commerce webinar were told.</div>

“Lumpy” project cargo demand is expected to lead to overutilization of the global multipurpose vessel fleet, participants in a Journal of Commerce webinar were told.

<div class="phx-topic">Strong and sustained volumes in the power business through 2027 and a promising outlook for mining will keep project cargo volumes buoyant, but only if shippers can maintain flexibility and secure tightening slots on multipurpose vessels, speakers participating in a Journal of Commerce webinar said. Brian Odell, lead ocean/barge/port mode specialist for power generation technology manufacturer GE Power, said he had not seen a “hint of slowdown” coming into 2026. And Jonathan Cournoyer, global discipline director for logistics at management, engineering and development consultancy HATCH, added that the push for security of supply of critical and rare minerals has prompted many countries to develop their own mines, further supporting project cargo demand this year. ”We’re lucky enough to have a lot of work in the pipeline,” Cournoyer said. “But we’re still a little bit worried about what could happen.” Pain points for the pair, both speakers on a Journal of Commerce breakbulk and project cargo 2026 outlook webcast on Jan. 22, include geopolitics, tariffs and near-static multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet supply. Recognizing that tariffs are “here to stay,” Cournoyer said HATCH accounts for tariffs in its evaluation of project costs. “For our US projects, this is very critical because a lot of the vendors located in the US that fabricate in the US actually become a lot more competitive than they would have if the tariffs were not there,” he said. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="fb97885d-0b88-4d65-99f6-10558c9e7c79"></dynamic-object></div>Odell also spoke about the practical issue of cargo readiness and making sure GE Power “can keep up with the vessels that we are putting on charter or have contracts with.” He said he manages the “ocean uncertainty” of tariffs by being flexible with vessels and route solutions and working closely with carriers. ”It’s just making sure I have the best information at the time to help plan, but keeping that flexibility in there,” Odell said. Odell said he leans on contracts of affreightments to secure shipping slots and rates at least a year out, building them around GE Power’s highest-volume areas or highest-volume flows. “That way, when it comes time for the projects to start rolling, they know who the contacts are, they can build that relationship with the carrier and the provider, and they can work with them directly and get exactly what they need,” he said. <h3>‘Lumpy’ cargo demand muddies outlook </h3>Also on the webcast, Susan Oatway, senior research analyst for breakbulk and project cargo at S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, said that the cargo demand picture was “lumpy.” With crude oil prices down to nearly $60 per barrel, she described that cargo-supplying sector as “decidedly patchy.” S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.On the fleet outlook, Oatway said the focus is on heavy-lift capability because the growth in demand is “almost certainly going to be there.” She forecasts heavy-lift fleet growth of 4.1% per year for the next four years, with newbuilding orders “trickling in.” Taken together, MPV/heavy-lift fleet growth is expected to average just under 2% through 2029, according to a Journal of Commerce/S&amp;P Global forecast. “My worry is that there are too many factors that can destabilize that market,” she said. “Excess container capacity, reopening of the Red Sea, increased port congestion — all of those will have a destabilizing effect in a way that is quite difficult to predict. ”And that’s even before we mention geopolitics and tariffs,” she added. Odell added that he has concerns that freight rates are going to increase due to overutilization because of what he called “a gold rush for power generation” in the US. ”It’s always trying to keep ahead of that,” he said, referring to those with cargo from other sectors having to book early to secure the capacity they need. Contact Carly Fields at <a href="mailto:carly.fields@spglobal.com">carly.fields@spglobal.com.</a></div>

Strong and sustained volumes in the power business through 2027 and a promising outlook for mining will keep project cargo volumes buoyant, but only if shippers can maintain flexibility and secure tightening slots on multipurpose vessels, speakers participating in a Journal of Commerce webinar said. Brian Odell, lead ocean/barge/port mode specialist for power generation technology manufacturer GE Power, said he had not seen a “hint of slowdown” coming into 2026. And Jonathan Cournoyer, global discipline director for logistics at management, engineering and development consultancy HATCH, added that the push for security of supply of critical and rare minerals has prompted many countries to develop their own mines, further supporting project cargo demand this year. ”We’re lucky enough to have a lot of work in the pipeline,” Cournoyer said. “But we’re still a little bit worried about what could happen.” Pain points for the pair, both speakers on a Journal of Commerce breakbulk and project cargo 2026 outlook webcast on Jan. 22, include geopolitics, tariffs and near-static multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet supply. Recognizing that tariffs are “here to stay,” Cournoyer said HATCH accounts for tariffs in its evaluation of project costs. “For our US projects, this is very critical because a lot of the vendors located in the US that fabricate in the US actually become a lot more competitive than they would have if the tariffs were not there,” he said. Odell also spoke about the practical issue of cargo readiness and making sure GE Power “can keep up with the vessels that we are putting on charter or have contracts with.” He said he manages the “ocean uncertainty” of tariffs by being flexible with vessels and route solutions and working closely with carriers. ”It’s just making sure I have the best information at the time to help plan, but keeping that flexibility in there,” Odell said. Odell said he leans on contracts of affreightments to secure shipping slots and rates at least a year out, building them around GE Power’s highest-volume areas or highest-volume flows. “That way, when it comes time for the projects to start rolling, they know who the contacts are, they can build that relationship with the carrier and the provider, and they can work with them directly and get exactly what they need,” he said. ‘Lumpy’ cargo demand muddies outlook Also on the webcast, Susan Oatway, senior research analyst for breakbulk and project cargo at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said that the cargo demand picture was “lumpy.” With crude oil prices down to nearly $60 per barrel, she described that cargo-supplying sector as “decidedly patchy.” S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. On the fleet outlook, Oatway said the focus is on heavy-lift capability because the growth in demand is “almost certainly going to be there.” She forecasts heavy-lift fleet growth of 4.1% per year for the next four years, with newbuilding orders “trickling in.” Taken together, MPV/heavy-lift fleet growth is expected to average just under 2% through 2029, according to a Journal of Commerce/S&P Global forecast. “My worry is that there are too many factors that can destabilize that market,” she said. “Excess container capacity, reopening of the Red Sea, increased port congestion — all of those will have a destabilizing effect in a way that is quite difficult to predict. ”And that’s even before we mention geopolitics and tariffs,” she added. Odell added that he has concerns that freight rates are going to increase due to overutilization because of what he called “a gold rush for power generation” in the US. ”It’s always trying to keep ahead of that,” he said, referring to those with cargo from other sectors having to book early to secure the capacity they need. Contact Carly Fields at carly.fields@spglobal.com.

Energy projects

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Power, mining bullishness offset by tightening MPV ship supply

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Taiwan’s third-largest carrier has said it would expand its network of terminals and storage facilities to obtain competitive tariffs at key ports in Asia. </div>

Taiwan’s third-largest carrier has said it would expand its network of terminals and storage facilities to obtain competitive tariffs at key ports in Asia.

<div class="phx-topic">Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines is adding to its Asia terminal network with an $89 million deal to lease terminal C-9 at Osaka’s Hanshin container port complex in Japan as part of its strategy to reduce costs and improve efficiencies by having its own dedicated berths. The move also strengthens Wan Hai’s presence in Japan following the launch of separate intra-Asia services linking Japan with Vietnam and Thailand in the last two years. Currently, Wan Hai operates six regional services with calls at Osaka. The carrier previously acquired Pier 5 at Tokyo’s Ohi terminal complex in 2003. Wan Hai said it would lease Osaka’s C-9 terminal in partnership with Mitsui Warehouse Terminal Service from Kobe-Osaka International Port Corporation. The carrier did not specify the length of the lease. Wan Hai acquired its stake from Mitsui’s former partner in the terminal, Mitsubishi Logistics Corporation. The lease agreement was approved internally by the carrier’s directors last week. Wan Hai, Taiwan’s third-largest carrier, said last year it would expand its network of terminals and storage facilities to obtain competitive tariffs at key ports in Asia. C-9 is Wan Hai's first terminal deal since it opened Haiphong International Container Terminal in northern Vietnam in 2018. The carrier’s other terminal investments in Asia include berths in Taichung and Taipei in Taiwan, Cai Mep and Da Nang in Vietnam and Qingdao, China. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="keithwallis@hotmail.com.">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Taiwan’s Wan Hai Lines is adding to its Asia terminal network with an $89 million deal to lease terminal C-9 at Osaka’s Hanshin container port complex in Japan as part of its strategy to reduce costs and improve efficiencies by having its own dedicated berths. The move also strengthens Wan Hai’s presence in Japan following the launch of separate intra-Asia services linking Japan with Vietnam and Thailand in the last two years. Currently, Wan Hai operates six regional services with calls at Osaka. The carrier previously acquired Pier 5 at Tokyo’s Ohi terminal complex in 2003. Wan Hai said it would lease Osaka’s C-9 terminal in partnership with Mitsui Warehouse Terminal Service from Kobe-Osaka International Port Corporation. The carrier did not specify the length of the lease. Wan Hai acquired its stake from Mitsui’s former partner in the terminal, Mitsubishi Logistics Corporation. The lease agreement was approved internally by the carrier’s directors last week. Wan Hai, Taiwan’s third-largest carrier, said last year it would expand its network of terminals and storage facilities to obtain competitive tariffs at key ports in Asia. C-9 is Wan Hai's first terminal deal since it opened Haiphong International Container Terminal in northern Vietnam in 2018. The carrier’s other terminal investments in Asia include berths in Taichung and Taipei in Taiwan, Cai Mep and Da Nang in Vietnam and Qingdao, China. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Port News

Container lines

Marine terminals

International ports

Container Shipping News

Maritime

Wan Hai expands Asia terminal network with $89 million Osaka port lease

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Echo’s Doug Waggoner said the opportunity to acquire ITS came as part of his company’s virtually constant search for potential additions.</div>

Echo’s Doug Waggoner said the opportunity to acquire ITS came as part of his company’s virtually constant search for potential additions.

<div class="phx-topic">Echo Global Logistics’ <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/broker-echo-buys-its-logistics-to-build-drayage-intermodal-presence-6155888">acquisition of ITS Logistics</a> cements Echo’s position as a top-five third-party logistics provider (3PL), CEO Doug Waggoner told the Journal of Commerce Monday. “It’s going to position us well as one of the biggest diversified, high-growth, non-asset providers on the market,” Waggoner said. “ITS is a big bite of the apple for us.” The deal, Echo’s biggest since its 2015 acquisition of Command Transportation for $420 million, is complementary to the company’s business, both in terms of services and customer bases, Waggoner said. Privately-held Echo, the fifth-largest brokerage in the US, secures a major network of drayage, intermodal and drop trailer assets with the ITS deal. Terms of the acquisition, announced last week, were not disclosed. “We’re heavy in industrial and food and beverage, and they’re heavy in automative and retail and e-commerce,” he said. “They didn’t have cross-border exposure. So there’s a huge opportunity to go to their automotive customers and let us handle the cross-border piece.” The fit works from the standpoint of customer size as well, as Echo’s freight brokerage business largely serves small and medium-sized shippers for spot capacity needs and larger enterprise shippers for contract space needs, while ITS has had a focus on larger enterprises. In terms of services, Waggoner said ITS’ drayage and warehousing networks, along with its fleet of 5,000 trailers, fit in with Echo’s focus on managed transportation services and truckload and less-than-truckload brokerage. <h3>ITS ‘fills a gap’ </h3>The opportunity to acquire ITS came as part of Echo’s virtually constant search for potential additions, with Waggoner saying the company considers 50 to 100 companies annually, with “a small subset where we drill down more deeply.” He said the hard-charging culture of ITS’ executive team and its 48% compound annual growth rate since 2013, even through a downturn in freight rates over the past few years, were impressive. “They fill a gap in our product offering that we needed,” Waggoner said. “We’re not just a broker. We have warehousing, cross-border, retail consolidation, and the truckload market is only a part of what we do, and that diversification has allowed us to grow in the market.” Waggoner wouldn’t be drawn on whether the acquisition signals the start of a period of consolidation in the 3PL space, especially because the two businesses are complementary, rather than doubling down on a specific mode or segment. He did say he is bullish on the market for 2026. “The signs we’re seeing are that the market is going to improve in ’26,” he said. “It’s been balancing on a fulcrum of a tight market and a loose market.” Waggoner cited the exit of truckload carriers from the market, federal regulatory crackdowns on commercial drivers, and extreme weather events as factors that could tighten the sector. “When the truckload market tightens, that’s a rising tide that floats all boats,” he said. Relevant to Echo’s business, Waggoner said any tightness will drive the company’s current 60-40 ratio of contract freight to spot freight to flip to 60-40 in the other direction. With more cargo moving on higher spot rates, that could compound topline growth for brokers with scale. Waggoner pointed specifically to proprietary AI-based pricing and quoting tools developed during the down cycle that he said will really show their value when the market tightens and spot rates become more in play. He estimated the brokerage market has grown to be a $100 billion segment of the industry, largely because large brokers, including Echo, have won business from shippers. “Shippers are agnostic as to whether you have trucks or not,” he said. “When they’re running a routing guide, we’re another carrier to them and one with really good technology. And that effectively increases the size of the market.” The combined Echo-ITS would create a company with $5.4 billion in revenue. The deal is expected to close in the first half of the year. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Echo Global Logistics’ acquisition of ITS Logistics cements Echo’s position as a top-five third-party logistics provider (3PL), CEO Doug Waggoner told the Journal of Commerce Monday. “It’s going to position us well as one of the biggest diversified, high-growth, non-asset providers on the market,” Waggoner said. “ITS is a big bite of the apple for us.” The deal, Echo’s biggest since its 2015 acquisition of Command Transportation for $420 million, is complementary to the company’s business, both in terms of services and customer bases, Waggoner said. Privately-held Echo, the fifth-largest brokerage in the US, secures a major network of drayage, intermodal and drop trailer assets with the ITS deal. Terms of the acquisition, announced last week, were not disclosed. “We’re heavy in industrial and food and beverage, and they’re heavy in automative and retail and e-commerce,” he said. “They didn’t have cross-border exposure. So there’s a huge opportunity to go to their automotive customers and let us handle the cross-border piece.” The fit works from the standpoint of customer size as well, as Echo’s freight brokerage business largely serves small and medium-sized shippers for spot capacity needs and larger enterprise shippers for contract space needs, while ITS has had a focus on larger enterprises. In terms of services, Waggoner said ITS’ drayage and warehousing networks, along with its fleet of 5,000 trailers, fit in with Echo’s focus on managed transportation services and truckload and less-than-truckload brokerage. ITS ‘fills a gap’ The opportunity to acquire ITS came as part of Echo’s virtually constant search for potential additions, with Waggoner saying the company considers 50 to 100 companies annually, with “a small subset where we drill down more deeply.” He said the hard-charging culture of ITS’ executive team and its 48% compound annual growth rate since 2013, even through a downturn in freight rates over the past few years, were impressive. “They fill a gap in our product offering that we needed,” Waggoner said. “We’re not just a broker. We have warehousing, cross-border, retail consolidation, and the truckload market is only a part of what we do, and that diversification has allowed us to grow in the market.” Waggoner wouldn’t be drawn on whether the acquisition signals the start of a period of consolidation in the 3PL space, especially because the two businesses are complementary, rather than doubling down on a specific mode or segment. He did say he is bullish on the market for 2026. “The signs we’re seeing are that the market is going to improve in ’26,” he said. “It’s been balancing on a fulcrum of a tight market and a loose market.” Waggoner cited the exit of truckload carriers from the market, federal regulatory crackdowns on commercial drivers, and extreme weather events as factors that could tighten the sector. “When the truckload market tightens, that’s a rising tide that floats all boats,” he said. Relevant to Echo’s business, Waggoner said any tightness will drive the company’s current 60-40 ratio of contract freight to spot freight to flip to 60-40 in the other direction. With more cargo moving on higher spot rates, that could compound topline growth for brokers with scale. Waggoner pointed specifically to proprietary AI-based pricing and quoting tools developed during the down cycle that he said will really show their value when the market tightens and spot rates become more in play. He estimated the brokerage market has grown to be a $100 billion segment of the industry, largely because large brokers, including Echo, have won business from shippers. “Shippers are agnostic as to whether you have trucks or not,” he said. “When they’re running a routing guide, we’re another carrier to them and one with really good technology. And that effectively increases the size of the market.” The combined Echo-ITS would create a company with $5.4 billion in revenue. The deal is expected to close in the first half of the year. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Logistics Technology News

Drayage

Truckload

Truck brokers

ITS acquisition a ‘big bite’ for Echo in market diversification drive: CEO

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">After announcing a pause on ship attacks in November, the Iran-backed militants posted a pair of threatening videos over the weekend that are sure to cause fresh concerns for ocean carriers planning a return to the Red Sea.</div>

After announcing a pause on ship attacks in November, the Iran-backed militants posted a pair of threatening videos over the weekend that are sure to cause fresh concerns for ocean carriers planning a return to the Red Sea.

<div class="phx-topic">Yemen’s Houthi militants have warned of new attacks on shipping in the Red Sea as tensions escalate between the US and Iran, raising questions over whether moves by some carriers to return services to the shorter Suez Canal route will actually happen. A Houthi video posted on YouTube over the weekend showed a ship on fire accompanied by the headline: “Soon.” It was followed by another video, this one from Houthi spokesman Brigadier Yahya Saree, pointing to “the escalation of possibilities” of the US launching a military strike against Iran, which he said would be met by retaliation against the US and Israel. The Iran-backed Houthi announced a pause on ship attacks in November following the Israel-Hamas ceasefire in Gaza that was agreed the previous month and have so far honored that pledge. But Iran’s clampdown on anti-government protests in late December sparked a threat earlier this month by US President Donald Trump to respond militarily, with a carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln now heading for the region. Even before the new Houthi threat, CMA CGM, one of the main Red Sea users over the past two years, said it would <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-backs-off-plans-to-resume-suez-transits-for-asia-europe-services-6155264">scale back plans to send three Asia-Europe westbound services</a> through the Suez, citing the “complex and uncertain international context.” <h3>Maersk India-US service due to begin shorter route </h3>Maersk’s <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersk-set-to-resume-regular-suez-transits-on-india-usec-mecl-loop-sources-6152441">MECL service from India to the US East Coast</a> is due to be rerouted through the Suez and Red Sea beginning Monday. While no change of plan has been announced, the volatility in the region prompted the carrier to include a caveat in its Jan. 15 advisory announcing a return to the shorter route. “Maersk has contingency plans in place should the security situation deteriorate, which may necessitate reverting individual MECL sailings or the wider structural change of the MECL service back to the Cape of Good Hope route,” the carrier said. While Maersk tests the waters and CMA CGM continues to send regional and back-haul services through the Red Sea, most of the other major carriers are content to maintain longer transits around southern Africa until the fluid geopolitical environment stabilizes. Carriers have used the longer route since the Houthis began attacks against commercial shipping in late 2023 in response to the Israel-Hamas war. Resuming services through the Suez represents more than just a routing change. Oversupplied carriers have benefited from the longer route absorbing about 8% of global capacity, preventing rates from falling. “A full-scale return of liner services to the Red Sea would initially be disruptive, with increased risks of port congestion, landside capacity constraints and short-term cost implications,” Bjoern Schoon, senior vice president of ocean freight at DHL Global Forwarding/Asia-Pacific, said in a market update last week. “However, once networks stabilize, it will benefit shippers through faster transit times, and the trade is likely to become more competitive on pricing,” Schoon added. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Yemen’s Houthi militants have warned of new attacks on shipping in the Red Sea as tensions escalate between the US and Iran, raising questions over whether moves by some carriers to return services to the shorter Suez Canal route will actually happen. A Houthi video posted on YouTube over the weekend showed a ship on fire accompanied by the headline: “Soon.” It was followed by another video, this one from Houthi spokesman Brigadier Yahya Saree, pointing to “the escalation of possibilities” of the US launching a military strike against Iran, which he said would be met by retaliation against the US and Israel. The Iran-backed Houthi announced a pause on ship attacks in November following the Israel-Hamas ceasefire in Gaza that was agreed the previous month and have so far honored that pledge. But Iran’s clampdown on anti-government protests in late December sparked a threat earlier this month by US President Donald Trump to respond militarily, with a carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln now heading for the region. Even before the new Houthi threat, CMA CGM, one of the main Red Sea users over the past two years, said it would scale back plans to send three Asia-Europe westbound services through the Suez, citing the “complex and uncertain international context.” Maersk India-US service due to begin shorter route Maersk’s MECL service from India to the US East Coast is due to be rerouted through the Suez and Red Sea beginning Monday. While no change of plan has been announced, the volatility in the region prompted the carrier to include a caveat in its Jan. 15 advisory announcing a return to the shorter route. “Maersk has contingency plans in place should the security situation deteriorate, which may necessitate reverting individual MECL sailings or the wider structural change of the MECL service back to the Cape of Good Hope route,” the carrier said. While Maersk tests the waters and CMA CGM continues to send regional and back-haul services through the Red Sea, most of the other major carriers are content to maintain longer transits around southern Africa until the fluid geopolitical environment stabilizes. Carriers have used the longer route since the Houthis began attacks against commercial shipping in late 2023 in response to the Israel-Hamas war. Resuming services through the Suez represents more than just a routing change. Oversupplied carriers have benefited from the longer route absorbing about 8% of global capacity, preventing rates from falling. “A full-scale return of liner services to the Red Sea would initially be disruptive, with increased risks of port congestion, landside capacity constraints and short-term cost implications,” Bjoern Schoon, senior vice president of ocean freight at DHL Global Forwarding/Asia-Pacific, said in a market update last week. “However, once networks stabilize, it will benefit shippers through faster transit times, and the trade is likely to become more competitive on pricing,” Schoon added. Contact Greg Knowler at  greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Latest Houthi threat renews questions about Suez route as US-Iran tensions rise 

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The agency ruled in 2024 that shippers can pick their own chassis when they arrange for truck transportation, but compliance with that ruling remains unclear. </div>

The agency ruled in 2024 that shippers can pick their own chassis when they arrange for truck transportation, but compliance with that ruling remains unclear.

<div class="phx-topic">The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is launching its second probe into chassis restrictions ocean carriers put on truckers when hauling a container. The probe comes after the agency ruled in 2024 that shippers can choose their own chassis when they contract with their own trucker. In a federal register notice Friday, the FMC said it plans to open a 60-day window for comments about “service contract terms or other means to mandate that motor carriers [truckers] and shippers use the ocean common carriers’ designated chassis.” The comments are sought in relation to an investigation by the FMC over allegations that “ocean common carriers may be in violation of the Shipping Act by unjustly and unreasonably restricting truckers and shippers from negotiating and dealing with chassis providers.”The investigation stems from <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-rules-for-truckers-in-chassis-dispute-with-ocean-carriers-5234355">the 2024 agency ruling</a> that ocean carriers have to stop mandating what specific chassis must be used under merchant haulage contracts. The agency upheld an administrative law judge’s earlier decision in a case between the American Trucking Association and the Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association (OCEMA) that <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocema-appeals-chassis-ruling-to-fmc-commissioners-5193253">container lines violate the Shipping Act when they restrict chassis choice</a> among shippers who are arranging their own container trucking. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-says-investigating-potential-violations-of-recent-ruling-on-chassis-control-5192272">The FMC was already investigating compliance</a> with a cease-and-desist order in the 2024 ruling, which is still ongoing. The new probe is looking for “any information concerning new or ongoing ocean common carrier practices ... to affect, restrict, or inhibit chassis provider selection,” the notice said. Part of the new probe involves whether ocean carriers designate single chassis providers at Chicago and Memphis rail ramps, if providers have enough chassis on-hand, any reimbursement for truckers on chassis split, and whether truckers are given notice about a container being under merchant or carrier haulage, the latter allowing an ocean carrier to choose a chassis. Along with the inland rail ramps, the FMC said its investigation is looking at chassis choice at the Savannah, Los Angeles, and Long Beach ports. As part of the probe into the Southern California market, the FMC is seeking how the “Pool of Pools” (PoP) operated by the three main chassis providers for the LA-LB ports distinguishes between “carrier haulage and merchant haulage containers and coordinate billing accordingly,” the notice said. OCEMA did not immediately respond to a request for comment into the new investigation.<h3>‘Sweetheart Deals’</h3>Robert Loya, chief executive of the Harbor Trucking Association, which represents drayage providers in Southern California, told the Journal of Commerce that some shippers have merchant haulage contracts that include a chassis at no additional cost, requiring the trucker to use the ocean carrier’s designated chassis. But servicing the LA-LB ports with the trucker’s own chassis and one from the PoP can result in wasted miles and more costs, he added.Returning an empty container on a PoP chassis can require a trip back to the trucker’s own yard for a shipper without an ocean carrier-provisioned chassis. Truckers are also forced to pay gate fees that marine terminals charge for temporarily storing PoP chassis.“The intermodal equipment providers have negotiated sweetheart deals with the shipping lines to use their chassis, then that gets negotiated into the ocean contract with the beneficial cargo owner,” Loya said. “That puts pressure on us, so we’re forced by the lines to use their chassis. That’s the rub for us.”<h3>Chassis mis-mounts</h3>An executive of a Tennessee-based drayage provider told the Journal of Commerce that ocean carrier chassis pools at inland rail terminals are vulnerable to shortages in times of high demand, resulting in potential delays if a trucker cannot use their own chassis.Containers can also come off a train and be mis-mounted onto the wrong chassis, causing a trucker to wait for the correct chassis. The executive said that what appears to be a no-cost chassis can mean added costs and inefficiencies for truckers.“The trucker is squeezed,” she said. “The frustration is that there’s no change after years. The US would have been better served if we had chassis choice during the pandemic. We need a faster and more fluid way to move freight.”Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is launching its second probe into chassis restrictions ocean carriers put on truckers when hauling a container. The probe comes after the agency ruled in 2024 that shippers can choose their own chassis when they contract with their own trucker. In a federal register notice Friday, the FMC said it plans to open a 60-day window for comments about “service contract terms or other means to mandate that motor carriers [truckers] and shippers use the ocean common carriers’ designated chassis.” The comments are sought in relation to an investigation by the FMC over allegations that “ocean common carriers may be in violation of the Shipping Act by unjustly and unreasonably restricting truckers and shippers from negotiating and dealing with chassis providers.” The investigation stems from the 2024 agency ruling that ocean carriers have to stop mandating what specific chassis must be used under merchant haulage contracts. The agency upheld an administrative law judge’s earlier decision in a case between the American Trucking Association and the Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association (OCEMA) that container lines violate the Shipping Act when they restrict chassis choice among shippers who are arranging their own container trucking. The FMC was already investigating compliance with a cease-and-desist order in the 2024 ruling, which is still ongoing. The new probe is looking for “any information concerning new or ongoing ocean common carrier practices ... to affect, restrict, or inhibit chassis provider selection,” the notice said. Part of the new probe involves whether ocean carriers designate single chassis providers at Chicago and Memphis rail ramps, if providers have enough chassis on-hand, any reimbursement for truckers on chassis split, and whether truckers are given notice about a container being under merchant or carrier haulage, the latter allowing an ocean carrier to choose a chassis. Along with the inland rail ramps, the FMC said its investigation is looking at chassis choice at the Savannah, Los Angeles, and Long Beach ports. As part of the probe into the Southern California market, the FMC is seeking how the “Pool of Pools” (PoP) operated by the three main chassis providers for the LA-LB ports distinguishes between “carrier haulage and merchant haulage containers and coordinate billing accordingly,” the notice said. OCEMA did not immediately respond to a request for comment into the new investigation. ‘Sweetheart Deals’ Robert Loya, chief executive of the Harbor Trucking Association, which represents drayage providers in Southern California, told the Journal of Commerce that some shippers have merchant haulage contracts that include a chassis at no additional cost, requiring the trucker to use the ocean carrier’s designated chassis. But servicing the LA-LB ports with the trucker’s own chassis and one from the PoP can result in wasted miles and more costs, he added. Returning an empty container on a PoP chassis can require a trip back to the trucker’s own yard for a shipper without an ocean carrier-provisioned chassis. Truckers are also forced to pay gate fees that marine terminals charge for temporarily storing PoP chassis. “The intermodal equipment providers have negotiated sweetheart deals with the shipping lines to use their chassis, then that gets negotiated into the ocean contract with the beneficial cargo owner,” Loya said. “That puts pressure on us, so we’re forced by the lines to use their chassis. That’s the rub for us.” Chassis mis-mounts An executive of a Tennessee-based drayage provider told the Journal of Commerce that ocean carrier chassis pools at inland rail terminals are vulnerable to shortages in times of high demand, resulting in potential delays if a trucker cannot use their own chassis. Containers can also come off a train and be mis-mounted onto the wrong chassis, causing a trucker to wait for the correct chassis. The executive said that what appears to be a no-cost chassis can mean added costs and inefficiencies for truckers. “The trucker is squeezed,” she said. “The frustration is that there’s no change after years. The US would have been better served if we had chassis choice during the pandemic. We need a faster and more fluid way to move freight.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

FMC takes second look at ocean carrier limits on chassis choice

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The current market situation is favorable for BCOs, and the temptation will be great to drive down base rates because of internal cost pressures, writes John McCauley.</div>

The current market situation is favorable for BCOs, and the temptation will be great to drive down base rates because of internal cost pressures, writes John McCauley.

<div class="phx-topic">At this time of year, many have reflected on 2025 and made resolutions for 2026. I have adjusted this to make no resolutions, but a few predictions that, in most cases, I hope will not materialize. In addition, I want to give some advice to beneficial cargo owners (BCOs), many of whom are in various stages of negotiations for 2026–27 service contracts. Starting with the predictions, let’s consider some supply, capacity, and demand issues. <h3>Capacity </h3>I expect Red Sea transits will resume, but very slowly and primarily for East Med cargo and for the India sub-continent to the East Coast of the US. Asia-Europe transits will only resume if insurance premiums disappear. The Houthis are still present and will be volatile and unreliable, so they remain the wild card for this prediction. At best, Asia-Europe, if Suez passage resumes, would take six months to stabilize. The US port fees for Chinese-built and -owned vessels will be a non-event. However, for carriers, the sword of Damocles is hanging over this one, so don’t expect any major service reshuffles. Sadly, service reliability levels will stay stable at a horrible 60%, notwithstanding the herculean efforts of Gemini to drag the industry up. Most carriers won’t care enough to do something about it. Expect significant trucking and drayage disruption in the US. Bankruptcies will rise as seasonality gets more unpredictable. Driver shortages will get worse. The consequences will be price volatility, both up and down, with significant backlogs adding to detention and demurrage bills. Berthing and landside restrictions will continue to hinder moving larger vessels to north-south trades as few terminals are deep-sea; they are river or bay, at best, and are often hemmed in by towns and cities and tidal-constrained. <h3>Demand </h3>Many BCOs are under high internal pressure to contribute to reductions in overall supply chain costs as margins become thinner through higher input costs (somewhat largely driven by tariffs), downstream price squeezing, and weaker demand. Container freight downward trends will be an obvious target. Keep an eye on US credit card debt and defaults, which will rise significantly by the third quarter at the latest, thus further softening demand. Macro level indicators will prey on demand. US inflation will remain stubbornly near at least 2.5% to 3% while unemployment will remain at about 4.5% as immigration net deficits offset layoffs. Job creation will stagnate. Depending on the GDP trend, expect a high likelihood of stagflation toward the end of the fourth quarter (subject to the reliability of US government data). China will continue manufacturing export expansion and increase its proportion of global trade. <h3>Recommendation </h3>What does this mean for upcoming service contract negotiations? With the expectation of vessel oversupply continuing through the year, BCOs will push to the limit to reduce base rates. They will face several dilemmas, including how to get rid of unmerited and unjustifiable surcharges and which carriers to choose from in alliances and vessel-sharing agreements. Overall, the market situation is favorable for BCOs. The temptation to drive down base rates will be great because of internal cost pressures and/or wanting to make up for some years of carrier supply strength. This should be tempered with a caveat that many BCOs have been burnt in the past for being too empathetic to carriers’ financial difficulties. If I were in the shoes of a medium-size BCO of 30,000 TEUs and above, I would select a mix that would aim for base rates around the Xeneta/NYSHEX forecast average index levels, even if offered lower rates than those levels. It is important to keep in with Mediterranean Shipping Co. even if you don’t use them today. I would use index-linked contracts today and continue to do so with a maximum of 50% to leave yourself some volume for fixed rates and some spot prices. Of that remaining volume, I would leave about 25% for spot as the downside risk is still relatively low. Finally, the market situation should allow for BCOs to get into their contracts the exclusion of any non-explainable (by the carrier) and justifiable (judged and accepted by the BCO) surcharges. John McCauley, formerly a vice president of transportation and logistics at Cargill, now consults for shippers. Contact him at <a href="mailto:john-mccauley1@outlook.com">john-mccauley1@outlook.com</a>.</div>

At this time of year, many have reflected on 2025 and made resolutions for 2026. I have adjusted this to make no resolutions, but a few predictions that, in most cases, I hope will not materialize. In addition, I want to give some advice to beneficial cargo owners (BCOs), many of whom are in various stages of negotiations for 2026–27 service contracts. Starting with the predictions, let’s consider some supply, capacity, and demand issues. Capacity I expect Red Sea transits will resume, but very slowly and primarily for East Med cargo and for the India sub-continent to the East Coast of the US. Asia-Europe transits will only resume if insurance premiums disappear. The Houthis are still present and will be volatile and unreliable, so they remain the wild card for this prediction. At best, Asia-Europe, if Suez passage resumes, would take six months to stabilize. The US port fees for Chinese-built and -owned vessels will be a non-event. However, for carriers, the sword of Damocles is hanging over this one, so don’t expect any major service reshuffles. Sadly, service reliability levels will stay stable at a horrible 60%, notwithstanding the herculean efforts of Gemini to drag the industry up. Most carriers won’t care enough to do something about it. Expect significant trucking and drayage disruption in the US. Bankruptcies will rise as seasonality gets more unpredictable. Driver shortages will get worse. The consequences will be price volatility, both up and down, with significant backlogs adding to detention and demurrage bills. Berthing and landside restrictions will continue to hinder moving larger vessels to north-south trades as few terminals are deep-sea; they are river or bay, at best, and are often hemmed in by towns and cities and tidal-constrained. Demand Many BCOs are under high internal pressure to contribute to reductions in overall supply chain costs as margins become thinner through higher input costs (somewhat largely driven by tariffs), downstream price squeezing, and weaker demand. Container freight downward trends will be an obvious target. Keep an eye on US credit card debt and defaults, which will rise significantly by the third quarter at the latest, thus further softening demand. Macro level indicators will prey on demand. US inflation will remain stubbornly near at least 2.5% to 3% while unemployment will remain at about 4.5% as immigration net deficits offset layoffs. Job creation will stagnate. Depending on the GDP trend, expect a high likelihood of stagflation toward the end of the fourth quarter (subject to the reliability of US government data). China will continue manufacturing export expansion and increase its proportion of global trade. Recommendation What does this mean for upcoming service contract negotiations? With the expectation of vessel oversupply continuing through the year, BCOs will push to the limit to reduce base rates. They will face several dilemmas, including how to get rid of unmerited and unjustifiable surcharges and which carriers to choose from in alliances and vessel-sharing agreements. Overall, the market situation is favorable for BCOs. The temptation to drive down base rates will be great because of internal cost pressures and/or wanting to make up for some years of carrier supply strength. This should be tempered with a caveat that many BCOs have been burnt in the past for being too empathetic to carriers’ financial difficulties. If I were in the shoes of a medium-size BCO of 30,000 TEUs and above, I would select a mix that would aim for base rates around the Xeneta/NYSHEX forecast average index levels, even if offered lower rates than those levels. It is important to keep in with Mediterranean Shipping Co. even if you don’t use them today. I would use index-linked contracts today and continue to do so with a maximum of 50% to leave yourself some volume for fixed rates and some spot prices. Of that remaining volume, I would leave about 25% for spot as the downside risk is still relatively low. Finally, the market situation should allow for BCOs to get into their contracts the exclusion of any non-explainable (by the carrier) and justifiable (judged and accepted by the BCO) surcharges. John McCauley, formerly a vice president of transportation and logistics at Cargill, now consults for shippers. Contact him at john-mccauley1@outlook.com .

Trans-Pacific

A few market predictions and some advice for BCOs as contract season heats up

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight recession, but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components, writes Ted Prince.</div>

There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight recession, but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components, writes Ted Prince.

<div class="phx-topic">In 1948, Gerald Hern, sports editor of the Boston Post, composed a brief poem describing the Boston Braves’ pitching en route to the 1948 National League pennant: First we’ll use Spahn then we’ll use Sain Then an off day, followed by rain Back will come Spahn, followed by Sain And followed, we hope, by two days of rain Warren Spahn and Johnny Sain were responsible for 39 of the Braves’ 91 victories that year. However, it was common to have a one-two punch at the top of a team’s pitching rotation. Intermodal has a similar duality: international and domestic — primarily dry 40- and 53-foot containers, respectively. While intermodal has a plethora of markets and equipment, the two segments have been carrying the industry for decades to constant new heights. They are also closely correlated in that a great deal of the domestic market is import cargo that was transloaded on the West Coast for movement inland. Hern’s work comes to mind when thinking about intermodal’s performance in 2025 and its prospects for 2026. Unlike the hoped-for two days of good rain, the industry has endured four years of painful rain since the halcyon volumes of 2021, the “good old days” of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight “recession,” but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components. As a result, intermodal has frequently found itself as a surface freight alternative that is slower and more expensive than trucking. And while there were some green shoots in 2024, the industry has been hoping for a second-half recovery — that has failed to materialize — in each of the past three years. The same seems true for 2026. <h3>Supply and demand drivers </h3>As we look forward, we need to consider supply and demand drivers. “Affordability” has taken the place of prominence in our political lexicon. As the costs of food and housing rise, discretionary income for other consumer products has shriveled and reduced demand. The same goes for increasing credit card, car, and student loan debt. Regardless of mortgage rates, there are long-term limitations on housing starts. This can further reduce consumer demand because so many purchases — e.g., furniture, home, electronics, etc. — are often associated with new homes. And although seven-year car loans have become more common, I don’t believe 50-year home mortgages will have the same penetration. With demand problematic, intermodal success will probably rely on supply changes. Many contend that the demand during the early days of COVID-19 created excess capacity that the truck market is still trying to absorb. However, it is unclear whether there was really an increase in overall capacity, or just realignment as many truckers decided to go out on their own. Regardless, there were a number of carriers that acquired capacity at historically high prices and must keep operating to just make their payments. The normal culling of unprofitable capacity was precluded by this inability to exit the market, ensuring a never-ending supply of zombie truckers. This capacity is getting older and more expensive to operate. Nevertheless, there is a feeling (or hope?) that 2026 will finally see marginal carriers leave the market and rate stability restored. <h3>Enhanced regulatory oversight </h3>The environmental green benefits of intermodal are not a priority for the current administration, so economic green will be paramount. Most likely that would come from increased regulatory oversight. Enhanced enforcement on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses is reducing driver supply. And there is still the unknown of hacked electronic logging devices allowing for illegal hours of service. What is unclear is whether these initiatives will impact truckload and drayage carriers equally, or whether one segment will suffer disproportionate opprobrium. If it is the former, intermodal will be advantaged; however, if it is the latter, maybe not. The former would be a rising tide that would raise all intermodal ships, whereas the latter could see the further ascendance of bimodal operations with integrated drayage overseen by robust safety regimens. In an attempt to increase demand, we can expect major players to assume prominent roles. Railroads and bimodals will seek to deploy equipment that has been stored for years. Ocean carriers will continue to consider their inland options. Finally, ports may become more involved as they explore inland options to attract more discretionary cargo. There are no historical comparisons for the last five years. It is unclear when the market will turn, but when it does, the recovery will follow Ernest Hemingway’s description: “Gradually, then suddenly.” We can then hope for the sun also to rise on intermodal. Ted Prince is founder and CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal LLC. Contact him at <a href="mailto:ted@tricitiesintermodal.com">ted@tricitiesintermodal.com</a>.</div>

In 1948, Gerald Hern, sports editor of the Boston Post, composed a brief poem describing the Boston Braves’ pitching en route to the 1948 National League pennant: First we’ll use Spahn then we’ll use Sain Then an off day, followed by rain Back will come Spahn, followed by Sain And followed, we hope, by two days of rain Warren Spahn and Johnny Sain were responsible for 39 of the Braves’ 91 victories that year. However, it was common to have a one-two punch at the top of a team’s pitching rotation. Intermodal has a similar duality: international and domestic — primarily dry 40- and 53-foot containers, respectively. While intermodal has a plethora of markets and equipment, the two segments have been carrying the industry for decades to constant new heights. They are also closely correlated in that a great deal of the domestic market is import cargo that was transloaded on the West Coast for movement inland. Hern’s work comes to mind when thinking about intermodal’s performance in 2025 and its prospects for 2026. Unlike the hoped-for two days of good rain, the industry has endured four years of painful rain since the halcyon volumes of 2021, the “good old days” of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are a lot of theories explaining the current freight “recession,” but there is no disputing that decreased demand, cutthroat competition, and plummeting rates have occurred simultaneously with inflationary cost components. As a result, intermodal has frequently found itself as a surface freight alternative that is slower and more expensive than trucking. And while there were some green shoots in 2024, the industry has been hoping for a second-half recovery — that has failed to materialize — in each of the past three years. The same seems true for 2026. Supply and demand drivers As we look forward, we need to consider supply and demand drivers. “Affordability” has taken the place of prominence in our political lexicon. As the costs of food and housing rise, discretionary income for other consumer products has shriveled and reduced demand. The same goes for increasing credit card, car, and student loan debt. Regardless of mortgage rates, there are long-term limitations on housing starts. This can further reduce consumer demand because so many purchases — e.g., furniture, home, electronics, etc. — are often associated with new homes. And although seven-year car loans have become more common, I don’t believe 50-year home mortgages will have the same penetration. With demand problematic, intermodal success will probably rely on supply changes. Many contend that the demand during the early days of COVID-19 created excess capacity that the truck market is still trying to absorb. However, it is unclear whether there was really an increase in overall capacity, or just realignment as many truckers decided to go out on their own. Regardless, there were a number of carriers that acquired capacity at historically high prices and must keep operating to just make their payments. The normal culling of unprofitable capacity was precluded by this inability to exit the market, ensuring a never-ending supply of zombie truckers. This capacity is getting older and more expensive to operate. Nevertheless, there is a feeling (or hope?) that 2026 will finally see marginal carriers leave the market and rate stability restored. Enhanced regulatory oversight The environmental green benefits of intermodal are not a priority for the current administration, so economic green will be paramount. Most likely that would come from increased regulatory oversight. Enhanced enforcement on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses is reducing driver supply. And there is still the unknown of hacked electronic logging devices allowing for illegal hours of service. What is unclear is whether these initiatives will impact truckload and drayage carriers equally, or whether one segment will suffer disproportionate opprobrium. If it is the former, intermodal will be advantaged; however, if it is the latter, maybe not. The former would be a rising tide that would raise all intermodal ships, whereas the latter could see the further ascendance of bimodal operations with integrated drayage overseen by robust safety regimens. In an attempt to increase demand, we can expect major players to assume prominent roles. Railroads and bimodals will seek to deploy equipment that has been stored for years. Ocean carriers will continue to consider their inland options. Finally, ports may become more involved as they explore inland options to attract more discretionary cargo. There are no historical comparisons for the last five years. It is unclear when the market will turn, but when it does, the recovery will follow Ernest Hemingway’s description: “Gradually, then suddenly.” We can then hope for the sun also to rise on intermodal. Ted Prince is founder and CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal LLC. Contact him at ted@tricitiesintermodal.com .

Surface

Intermodal providers

Supply chain

Pace of freight market recovery a matter of ‘gradually, then suddenly’

Notes: Data as of October 2025
Shaded areas indicate forecasts

MPV delivered

MPV demolished

HL capable delivered

HL capable demolished 

Net fleet loss/gain

The S&P Global multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet capacity database aggregates data for vessels that are in service, on order or have been demolished. The *Journal of Commerce* uses this database of current and historical data to forecast future newbuildings and demolitions.

Multipurpose and heavy-lift vessel deliveries and demolitions, with forecast  

MPV and HL Capable Fleet development Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Citing “the complex and uncertain international context,” the carrier said proforma voyages through the Suez that were confirmed last month would remain diverted via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa.</div>

Citing “the complex and uncertain international context,” the carrier said proforma voyages through the Suez that were confirmed last month would remain diverted via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa.

<div class="phx-topic">CMA CGM on Tuesday said it would scale back plans to reroute three Asia-Europe westbound services through the Red Sea and Suez that were announced just last month. The carrier’s about-face is a glaring example of the delicate balancing act facing liners as they chart a return to transits through the Red Sea while also acknowledging that the returns may be short-lived. The move comes as Maersk <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersk-set-to-resume-regular-suez-transits-on-india-usec-mecl-loop-sources-6152441">last week announced its scheduled MECL service</a> from India to the US East Coast would resume Suez sailings from Jan. 26. Citing “the complex and uncertain international context,” CMA CGM said in a statement that proforma voyages through the Suez that were confirmed last month on Asia-Europe would remain diverted via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa. “The CMA CGM Group has decided for the time being to reroute vessels deployed on our FAL 1, FAL 3 and MEX services via the Cape of Good Hope,” the carrier said in a statement, adding that the Suez situation would be regularly reviewed.   For carriers, the risks to crew and brand that come with a Suez/Red Sea return are high — despite Houthi rebels announcing in November that ship attacks would end — on top of the additional costs of diverting vessels should attacks resume.  There’s also the commercial concern of staying competitive with Suez transits offering up to 10-day shorter transits from Asia to Europe, and the larger risk of released capacity that would put immense downward pressure on rates. Carriers also must weigh the willingness of shippers and insurers to allow cargo to return to a potentially volatile route. “A hybrid routing is going to be the prevailing mode for this year, whereby carriers are going to start with more backhaul and lower-value cargo in Suez transits but keep on using the Cape of Good Hope for the higher-value head-haul voyages,” Simon Heaney, senior manager of container research at Drewry, told a webinar hosted by the maritime consultant Tuesday. “This is going to mean that more effective capacity will be drip fed back into the market over the course of the year and won’t happen all at once,” he added. “It will give carriers more time to assess the risk-reward position, prepare their future networks and prevent a total collapse in pricing.” Still, Heaney warned that overcapacity in the market would bring down rates, “regardless of how quickly Suez transits resume.” It was a position supported by transport analysts at HSBC, who said in a market update Tuesday that a swift return to Suez could cause a short-term increase in rates, but prices would decline through 2026. “Spot freight rates could fall significantly and also weigh on this year’s trans-Pacific [service contract talks] in April and May,” HSBC said. <h3>Some scheduled services take shorter route </h3>Ocean carriers have been increasing their transits via the Suez and Red Sea recently, encouraged by the absence of Houthi attacks that began in late 2023 and forced lengthy diversions around southern Africa.   The working approach so far, led by CMA CGM and with Maersk and other carriers starting to follow, has been to route India-US services through the Suez. CMA CGM is operating its service from India to the US via the Suez and Maersk will resume sailings for its MECL (India, Middle East-US East Coast) service via the Red Sea and Suez Canal from Jan. 26. The Ocean Alliance has scheduled all eastbound legs of its NEU4 Asia-Europe service from January and its MED2 Asia-Mediterranean service from February via the Suez. Getting shippers onboard will be a crucial part of the Suez-return puzzle. Some shippers tell the Journal of Commerce that directives from their C-suites prevent them from considering Suez voyages despite the better transit time. Other cargo owners, such as the supply chain director for a Europe-based shipper, have no problem using the Egyptian waterway.“Our global insurance policy isn’t significantly affected by shipping through the Red Sea, so if the services are there and the cost makes sense, then there wouldn’t be much stopping us from using them,” the source said. “But it all seems very tentative,” he added. “I think what we’re seeing is the tension between carriers wanting to attract cargo by offering a diverse mix of transit times, and a fear of crashing the market or a return to bunching at the ports in Asia and Europe.” Drewry noted that insurance costs were less of an impediment, with premiums expressed as a percentage of the vessel hull value currently about 0.2% or 0.3%, down from a high of 1% in the two years since the Red Sea attacks began. <h3>Two-route voyage schedule </h3>Drewry’s expectations of a two-route Suez-Africa voyage schedule this year reflected the cautious approach from carriers and alliances, as well as shippers that want to avoid valuable cargo being put at risk while factoring into contracts any resumption of the shorter route.“We know that depending on the direction of the voyage and the size of the ship, the multiple of the goods value versus the ship value can range from five to 10 times,” Heaney told the webinar.   Most of the Asia-Europe annual contracting has been completed for the year, with shippers and forwarders telling the Journal of Commerce that a return to the Suez has been factored in. “We have built some flex into our negotiations on these lanes this year that allows for a renegotiation in case there is a sudden rush back to the Red Sea route,” the head of logistics at a European retailer said. It was an approach supported by Philip Damas, managing director of Drewry Shipping Consultants, who said low rates were a given through 2026 while shippers were asking for two rates — one for current transits via the Cape and one for the Suez.  “That option makes it easier to later effectively apply the relevant rates,” Damas told the Drewry webinar. “Another option is to negotiate based on the Cape routing and have a specific review clause that when the Suez Canal transits resume fully, there will be a renegotiation. Having that clause up front is probably easier.”  Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>.   </div>

CMA CGM on Tuesday said it would scale back plans to reroute three Asia-Europe westbound services through the Red Sea and Suez that were announced just last month. The carrier’s about-face is a glaring example of the delicate balancing act facing liners as they chart a return to transits through the Red Sea while also acknowledging that the returns may be short-lived.  The move comes as Maersk last week announced its scheduled MECL service from India to the US East Coast would resume Suez sailings from Jan. 26.  Citing “the complex and uncertain international context,” CMA CGM said in a statement that proforma voyages through the Suez that were confirmed last month on Asia-Europe would remain diverted via the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa.  “The CMA CGM Group has decided for the time being to reroute vessels deployed on our FAL 1, FAL 3 and MEX services via the Cape of Good Hope,” the carrier said in a statement, adding that the Suez situation would be regularly reviewed.    For carriers, the risks to crew and brand that come with a Suez/Red Sea return are high — despite Houthi rebels announcing in November that ship attacks would end — on top of the additional costs of diverting vessels should attacks resume.   There’s also the commercial concern of staying competitive with Suez transits offering up to 10-day shorter transits from Asia to Europe, and the larger risk of released capacity that would put immense downward pressure on rates. Carriers also must weigh the willingness of shippers and insurers to allow cargo to return to a potentially volatile route.  “A hybrid routing is going to be the prevailing mode for this year, whereby carriers are going to start with more backhaul and lower-value cargo in Suez transits but keep on using the Cape of Good Hope for the higher-value head-haul voyages,” Simon Heaney, senior manager of container research at Drewry, told a webinar hosted by the maritime consultant Tuesday.  “This is going to mean that more effective capacity will be drip fed back into the market over the course of the year and won’t happen all at once,” he added. “It will give carriers more time to assess the risk-reward position, prepare their future networks and prevent a total collapse in pricing.”  Still, Heaney warned that overcapacity in the market would bring down rates, “regardless of how quickly Suez transits resume.”  It was a position supported by transport analysts at HSBC, who said in a market update Tuesday that a swift return to Suez could cause a short-term increase in rates, but prices would decline through 2026.  “Spot freight rates could fall significantly and also weigh on this year’s trans-Pacific [service contract talks] in April and May,” HSBC said.  Some scheduled services take shorter route  Ocean carriers have been increasing their transits via the Suez and Red Sea recently, encouraged by the absence of Houthi attacks that began in late 2023 and forced lengthy diversions around southern Africa.   The working approach so far, led by CMA CGM and with Maersk and other carriers starting to follow, has been to route India-US services through the Suez. CMA CGM is operating its service from India to the US via the Suez and Maersk will resume sailings for its MECL (India, Middle East-US East Coast) service via the Red Sea and Suez Canal from Jan. 26.  The Ocean Alliance has scheduled all eastbound legs of its NEU4 Asia-Europe service from January and its MED2 Asia-Mediterranean service from February via the Suez.  Getting shippers onboard will be a crucial part of the Suez-return puzzle. Some shippers tell the Journal of Commerce that directives from their C-suites prevent them from considering Suez voyages despite the better transit time. Other cargo owners, such as the supply chain director for a Europe-based shipper, have no problem using the Egyptian waterway. “Our global insurance policy isn’t significantly affected by shipping through the Red Sea, so if the services are there and the cost makes sense, then there wouldn’t be much stopping us from using them,” the source said.  “But it all seems very tentative,” he added. “I think what we’re seeing is the tension between carriers wanting to attract cargo by offering a diverse mix of transit times, and a fear of crashing the market or a return to bunching at the ports in Asia and Europe.”  Drewry noted that insurance costs were less of an impediment, with premiums expressed as a percentage of the vessel hull value currently about 0.2% or 0.3%, down from a high of 1% in the two years since the Red Sea attacks began.  Two-route voyage schedule  Drewry’s expectations of a two-route Suez-Africa voyage schedule this year reflected the cautious approach from carriers and alliances, as well as shippers that want to avoid valuable cargo being put at risk while factoring into contracts any resumption of the shorter route. “We know that depending on the direction of the voyage and the size of the ship, the multiple of the goods value versus the ship value can range from five to 10 times,” Heaney told the webinar.    Most of the Asia-Europe annual contracting has been completed for the year, with shippers and forwarders telling the Journal of Commerce that a return to the Suez has been factored in.  “We have built some flex into our negotiations on these lanes this year that allows for a renegotiation in case there is a sudden rush back to the Red Sea route,” the head of logistics at a European retailer said.  It was an approach supported by Philip Damas, managing director of Drewry Shipping Consultants, who said low rates were a given through 2026 while shippers were asking for two rates — one for current transits via the Cape and one for the Suez.   “That option makes it easier to later effectively apply the relevant rates,” Damas told the Drewry webinar. “Another option is to negotiate based on the Cape routing and have a specific review clause that when the Suez Canal transits resume fully, there will be a renegotiation. Having that clause up front is probably easier.”   Contact Greg Knowler at  greg.knowler@spglobal.com .   

CMA CGM backs off plans to resume Suez transits for Asia-Europe services 

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date.</div>

The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date.

<div class="phx-topic">The US Surface Transportation Board dealt a blow Friday to Union Pacific Railroad’s $85 billion deal to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway, ruling the merger application UP filed last month is “incomplete.” The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date. UP must inform the STB before Feb. 17 whether it plans to refile an amended application, and can refile any time prior to June 22. Once resubmitted, the STB will initiate a similar 30-day review of the application’s completeness, which likely means it will not issue a final decision on the merger itself until at least the second half of 2027. "Given the deficiencies...the board finds the application is incomplete and, under the terms of the statute, must be rejected,” STB wrote in its ruling. “The board’s decision to reject the application should not be read as an indication of how the board might ultimately assess any revised application or future informational needs, should applicants decide to submit a revised application." In Friday’s 15-page decision, the STB highlighted three major deficiencies in the application, which was submitted by UP on Dec. 19. First, the regulators ruled that the traffic analysis underpinning the application is deficient because it uses market share totals from 2023 and fails to provide future market share projections. Second, the STB took issue with UP failing to disclose what’s called a “Schedule 5.8.” The document defines what counts as a “materially burdensome regulatory condition,” a regulatory outcome that could give UP the contractual right to walk away from the deal. UP had argued that the document didn’t need to be disclosed to the STB because it contains attorney-related work products. BNSF Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City, and Canadian National all filed objections to UP’s application based on the first two issues that were flagged by STB. The STB also found that the related Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis control application was misclassified as a “minor” transaction instead of a “significant” transaction. STB applies different procedural and evidentiary requirements to major, significant, and minor transactions. By deeming something significant instead of minor, it means the board wants to examine the issues involved more closely. The STB also noted several minor, technical issues that should be addressed in a revised application. While the board did not specify what those issues were, a Journal of Commerce analysis of the application found spelling errors and cities labeled with the incorrect state. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a></div>

The US Surface Transportation Board dealt a blow Friday to Union Pacific Railroad’s $85 billion deal to acquire Norfolk Southern Railway, ruling the merger application UP filed last month is “incomplete.” The regulator’s decision was unanimous, but Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern can fix what is deficient in the application and resubmit it at a later date. UP must inform the STB before Feb. 17 whether it plans to refile an amended application, and can refile any time prior to June 22. Once resubmitted, the STB will initiate a similar 30-day review of the application’s completeness, which likely means it will not issue a final decision on the merger itself until at least the second half of 2027. "Given the deficiencies...the board finds the application is incomplete and, under the terms of the statute, must be rejected,” STB wrote in its ruling. “The board’s decision to reject the application should not be read as an indication of how the board might ultimately assess any revised application or future informational needs, should applicants decide to submit a revised application." In Friday’s 15-page decision, the STB highlighted three major deficiencies in the application, which was submitted by UP on Dec. 19. First, the regulators ruled that the traffic analysis underpinning the application is deficient because it uses market share totals from 2023 and fails to provide future market share projections. Second, the STB took issue with UP failing to disclose what’s called a “Schedule 5.8.” The document defines what counts as a “materially burdensome regulatory condition,” a regulatory outcome that could give UP the contractual right to walk away from the deal. UP had argued that the document didn’t need to be disclosed to the STB because it contains attorney-related work products. BNSF Railway, Canadian Pacific Kansas City, and Canadian National all filed objections to UP’s application based on the first two issues that were flagged by STB. The STB also found that the related Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis control application was misclassified as a “minor” transaction instead of a “significant” transaction. STB applies different procedural and evidentiary requirements to major, significant, and minor transactions. By deeming something significant instead of minor, it means the board wants to examine the issues involved more closely. The STB also noted several minor, technical issues that should be addressed in a revised application. While the board did not specify what those issues were, a Journal of Commerce analysis of the application found spelling errors and cities labeled with the incorrect state. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com

STB rejects UP-NS merger application as ‘incomplete’

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Noel Hacegaba made the announcement about the possible 1.8 million-TEU terminal during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero.</div>

Noel Hacegaba made the announcement about the possible 1.8 million-TEU terminal during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero.

<div class="phx-topic">The Port of Long Beach is exploring the possibility of developing what its new CEO said Thursday would be the “first conventional, zero-emissions container terminal in the world.” Noel Hacegaba made the announcement during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero. Hacegaba said Long Beach has inked an exclusive agreement with Brookfield Infrastructure Group for the potential development of a 1.8 million-TEU terminal designed for express vessels of up to 9,000-TEU capacity. The facility, being called the Metro Express Terminal, would be built on Long Beach’s Pier S and use zero-emission, human-operated equipment, container peel-off operations, 24/7 gate access, free-flow cargo stacks and zero-emission trucks, he said. If it comes to fruition, Brookfield would partner with Nautilus International on the project, further details of which were not disclosed in Hacegaba’s presentation. That presentation made clear that the Port of Long Beach will leverage marine terminal expansion, massive investment in intermodal rail connectivity and the creation of a supply chain information highway to handle a projected doubling of container volume by 2050. That comes after the port handled a record 9.9 million laden and empty TEUs in 2025, according to data from the port. “According to our latest cargo forecast, 2050 is the year our container volumes will reach 20 million TEUs,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach forecasts it will handle about 9 million TEUs this year, which although down from 2025, will still rank among its top five years, he said. Long Beach faces an immediate challenge in adjusting to diminishing imports from China due to the Trump administration’s tariffs, and fewer exports to China because of that country’s counter tariffs. “Six years ago, about 70% of all our cargo — imports and exports — was tied to China,” Hacegaba said. “Today that’s down to 60%.” While the tariffs have fostered a shifting of US trade to Vietnam and other countries in Southeast Asia, it has also highlighted the importance of adding “speed, precision and reliability” to the Long Beach supply chain as it competes for cargo with other US ports, he said. <h3>Emphasis on on-dock rail connectivity </h3>Long Beach is investing $1.8 billion in its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/inland-rail-connectivity-key-to-port-of-long-beach-growth-new-ceo-6133971">on-dock rail support facility at Pier B</a>, which is scheduled for completion in 2032. By assembling longer intermodal trains on dock rather than at near-dock sites that require a move by truck, the transfer of containers from vessel to train, which now takes slightly less than four days, will be reduced to 24 hours, Hacegaba said. “Our terminals are driving the movement of rail to inland points,” he said. “TTI (Total Terminals International) is already moving more than 50% of its containers by rail.” The <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-deal-could-benefit-some-shippers-while-others-face-longer-transits-6143225">proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern</a>, which would create the nation’s first transcontinental railroad, holds the potential for faster, more efficient intermodal service to rail hubs in the eastern half of the country. Also, the announcement in November by BNSF Railway and CSX that they will <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/intermodal-cooperation-on-rails-has-declined-amid-cost-pressures-6152067">expand their intermodal partnership for service connecting Long Beach with rail terminals in the Ohio Valley and the Northeast</a> will cut transit times by as much as two days, Hacegaba said. Five of Long Beach’s six container terminals last year handled more than 1 million TEUs, with two of those facilities handling more than 2 million TEUs. International Transportation Service and Macquarie Asset Management in July broke ground on a project that will fill in a 19-acre slip at Pier G that will enhance operational efficiency and build a single, continuous wharf measuring 3,400 feet that will accommodate the berthing of two super-post Panamax ships at the same time, Hacegaba said. <h3>Data sharing within the supply chain </h3>Hacegaba also announced that development is beginning on Long Beach’s CargoNav digital platform that will navigate the supply chain one container at a time, from arrival on the dock to shipment to its final destination. Further information will be released in the coming months. Emphasizing the importance of data sharing among carriers, terminal operators, truckers, railroads and shippers, Long Beach several years ago unveiled its supply chain information highway through its community portal. “The goal was simple, end-to-end visibility via coast-to-coast connectivity,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach in the coming weeks will also launch a universal trucking appointment system that members of the Harbor Trucking Association asked for several years ago, he said. Projects that improve operational efficiency will be another priority, Hacegaba said, particularly those that continue to reduce harmful emissions from vessels, cargo-handling equipment, tugboats, trucks, and trains. “As we continue our quest to zero emissions, we remain laser-focused on our core mission — moving more cargo more quickly, safely, efficiently, and sustainably,” he said Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a></div>

The Port of Long Beach is exploring the possibility of developing what its new CEO said Thursday would be the “first conventional, zero-emissions container terminal in the world.” Noel Hacegaba made the announcement during his first State of the Port presentation since taking over as CEO on Jan. 1 following the retirement of Mario Cordero. Hacegaba said Long Beach has inked an exclusive agreement with Brookfield Infrastructure Group for the potential development of a 1.8 million-TEU terminal designed for express vessels of up to 9,000-TEU capacity. The facility, being called the Metro Express Terminal, would be built on Long Beach’s Pier S and use zero-emission, human-operated equipment, container peel-off operations, 24/7 gate access, free-flow cargo stacks and zero-emission trucks, he said. If it comes to fruition, Brookfield would partner with Nautilus International on the project, further details of which were not disclosed in Hacegaba’s presentation. That presentation made clear that the Port of Long Beach will leverage marine terminal expansion, massive investment in intermodal rail connectivity and the creation of a supply chain information highway to handle a projected doubling of container volume by 2050. That comes after the port handled a record 9.9 million laden and empty TEUs in 2025, according to data from the port. “According to our latest cargo forecast, 2050 is the year our container volumes will reach 20 million TEUs,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach forecasts it will handle about 9 million TEUs this year, which although down from 2025, will still rank among its top five years, he said. Long Beach faces an immediate challenge in adjusting to diminishing imports from China due to the Trump administration’s tariffs, and fewer exports to China because of that country’s counter tariffs. “Six years ago, about 70% of all our cargo — imports and exports — was tied to China,” Hacegaba said. “Today that’s down to 60%.” While the tariffs have fostered a shifting of US trade to Vietnam and other countries in Southeast Asia, it has also highlighted the importance of adding “speed, precision and reliability” to the Long Beach supply chain as it competes for cargo with other US ports, he said. Emphasis on on-dock rail connectivity Long Beach is investing $1.8 billion in its on-dock rail support facility at Pier B , which is scheduled for completion in 2032. By assembling longer intermodal trains on dock rather than at near-dock sites that require a move by truck, the transfer of containers from vessel to train, which now takes slightly less than four days, will be reduced to 24 hours, Hacegaba said. “Our terminals are driving the movement of rail to inland points,” he said. “TTI (Total Terminals International) is already moving more than 50% of its containers by rail.” The proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern , which would create the nation’s first transcontinental railroad, holds the potential for faster, more efficient intermodal service to rail hubs in the eastern half of the country. Also, the announcement in November by BNSF Railway and CSX that they will expand their intermodal partnership for service connecting Long Beach with rail terminals in the Ohio Valley and the Northeast will cut transit times by as much as two days, Hacegaba said. Five of Long Beach’s six container terminals last year handled more than 1 million TEUs, with two of those facilities handling more than 2 million TEUs. International Transportation Service and Macquarie Asset Management in July broke ground on a project that will fill in a 19-acre slip at Pier G that will enhance operational efficiency and build a single, continuous wharf measuring 3,400 feet that will accommodate the berthing of two super-post Panamax ships at the same time, Hacegaba said. Data sharing within the supply chain Hacegaba also announced that development is beginning on Long Beach’s CargoNav digital platform that will navigate the supply chain one container at a time, from arrival on the dock to shipment to its final destination. Further information will be released in the coming months. Emphasizing the importance of data sharing among carriers, terminal operators, truckers, railroads and shippers, Long Beach several years ago unveiled its supply chain information highway through its community portal. “The goal was simple, end-to-end visibility via coast-to-coast connectivity,” Hacegaba said. Long Beach in the coming weeks will also launch a universal trucking appointment system that members of the Harbor Trucking Association asked for several years ago, he said. Projects that improve operational efficiency will be another priority, Hacegaba said, particularly those that continue to reduce harmful emissions from vessels, cargo-handling equipment, tugboats, trucks, and trains. “As we continue our quest to zero emissions, we remain laser-focused on our core mission — moving more cargo more quickly, safely, efficiently, and sustainably,” he said Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com

North American ports

Long Beach considering development of ‘conventional, zero-emissions' terminal: CEO

Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code NYW26 at checkout to save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

NEW YEAR SALE

Use code NYW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Subscribe today using code NYW26 at checkout and save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Use code NYW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code NYW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW26 to save 25% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

NEW YEAR SALE: Subscribe today using code NYW26 at checkout and save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

NEW YEAR SALE: Get into a Gold subscription today and save $500 by using code NYW995 at checkout!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

NEW YEAR SALE: Use code NYW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The carrier consortium released details of its new network showing a slight uptick in port calls primarily from Southeast Asia and small rotation changes on the US East Coast.</div>

The carrier consortium released details of its new network showing a slight uptick in port calls primarily from Southeast Asia and small rotation changes on the US East Coast.

<div class="phx-topic">Carriers in the Ocean Alliance will be offering North American shippers more connections from Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent as part of their 2026 network. Ocean Alliance carriers will also make their first return to the Port of Jacksonville in seven years with a new call on their Gulf Coast service. CMA CGM, Cosco Shipping and Evergreen Marine each announced this week the launch of the Ocean Alliance’s “Day 10” product covering 14 services to the North American West Coast and eight to the East Coast. The new network will go into effect as of April. While the number of services to North America did not change compared with the alliance’s 2025 network, the 2026 network to and from the US and Canada does feature new port rotations that highlight the ongoing shift of US importers away from China. The Port of Haiphong will see the biggest increase in North American connectivity. Calls to the Vietnamese port, where <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-signs-deal-to-develop-600-million-haiphong-terminal-complex-6012131">CMA CGM plans to build a $600 million terminal</a>, will be added to four trans-Pacific services to North America, according to Cosco’s Day 10 schedule. On the West Coast, those services include the Pacific Southwest 9 (PSW9) service to Long Beach and the Pacific Northwest 2 (PNW2) to the ports of Vancouver and Seattle. Haiphong remains a call for Ocean Alliance’s PSW1 service into Long Beach. However, another Long Beach service, PSW10, that previously called Haiphong as part of the 2025 network, appears to have been dropped in favor of the Port of Laem Chabang in Thailand. Ocean Alliance’s 2025 network previously had no regular service between Southeast Asia and the Pacific Northwest. On the East Coast, Haiphong will be added as a call to the USEC3 and 5 services. Haiphong was previously a call only on the Ocean Alliance’s USEC8 service into Norfolk as of 2025, but that call has been replaced with Vietnam’s Cai Mep as of the 2026 network. Laem Chabang will also be on the new rotation for the PSW7 service into Los Angeles. The Laem Chabang call appears to have replaced a call to Malaysia’s Port Klang featured on the 2025 network. The transshipment port of Colombo in Sri Lanka will also be added to the USEC5 service that makes first call at Savannah, adding a second Ocean Alliance service from the Indian subcontinent along with the current USEC3 service rotation. In addition, Ocean Alliance added Taiwan’s Kaohsiung as a backhaul on three West Coast trans-Pacific services, along with a westbound call to South Korea’s Busan. Chinese port rotations will also see small changes in the 2026 network. The southern China port of Yangpu, across the Beibu Gulf from Haiphong, will be added to the front-haul for the PSW9 and PNW2 services to the West Coast. Tianjin will also be added to the PSW5 service, while Hong Kong will be added to the PNW2 service.China’s Xiamen port will get a second service with a new call on the USEC4 service, adding to an existing call on the USEC2 service. But a previous Xiamen call on the USEC5 appears to have been dropped in favor of the new Haiphong call. Amid the ongoing sourcing shift away from China, container volumes from Southeast Asia to the US saw year-over-year gains in every month last year, with 10 of those months seeing double-digit gains, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global.<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="021af9b6-860f-45a6-99eb-549dc05cabfe"></dynamic-object></div><h3>Jacksonville gets Far East service</h3>Jacksonville this year will be on the rotation for Ocean Alliance’s USEC6 service that covers the US Gulf Coast. The USEC6 previously featured a call to New Orleans, but it’s not included in the 2026 network. While Jacksonville already has Asia services through the Premier Alliance, Mediterranean Shipping Co. and Zim Integrated Shipping, the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/jaxport-optimistic-on-growth-despite-service-loss-5236112">Ocean Alliance has not been a regular caller to the port since 2019</a> when it dropped Jacksonville on the same service. Other US rotation changes include dropping Charleston from the USEC4 service, while keeping the port on rotation for three other Ocean Alliance services. The USEC4 will replace the Charleston call with a call to Baltimore, but that port will be dropped from the USEC5 service. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Carriers in the Ocean Alliance will be offering North American shippers more connections from Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent as part of their 2026 network. Ocean Alliance carriers will also make their first return to the Port of Jacksonville in seven years with a new call on their Gulf Coast service. CMA CGM, Cosco Shipping and Evergreen Marine each announced this week the launch of the Ocean Alliance’s “Day 10” product covering 14 services to the North American West Coast and eight to the East Coast. The new network will go into effect as of April. While the number of services to North America did not change compared with the alliance’s 2025 network, the 2026 network to and from the US and Canada does feature new port rotations that highlight the ongoing shift of US importers away from China. The Port of Haiphong will see the biggest increase in North American connectivity. Calls to the Vietnamese port, where CMA CGM plans to build a $600 million terminal , will be added to four trans-Pacific services to North America, according to Cosco’s Day 10 schedule. On the West Coast, those services include the Pacific Southwest 9 (PSW9) service to Long Beach and the Pacific Northwest 2 (PNW2) to the ports of Vancouver and Seattle. Haiphong remains a call for Ocean Alliance’s PSW1 service into Long Beach. However, another Long Beach service, PSW10, that previously called Haiphong as part of the 2025 network, appears to have been dropped in favor of the Port of Laem Chabang in Thailand. Ocean Alliance’s 2025 network previously had no regular service between Southeast Asia and the Pacific Northwest. On the East Coast, Haiphong will be added as a call to the USEC3 and 5 services. Haiphong was previously a call only on the Ocean Alliance’s USEC8 service into Norfolk as of 2025, but that call has been replaced with Vietnam’s Cai Mep as of the 2026 network. Laem Chabang will also be on the new rotation for the PSW7 service into Los Angeles. The Laem Chabang call appears to have replaced a call to Malaysia’s Port Klang featured on the 2025 network. The transshipment port of Colombo in Sri Lanka will also be added to the USEC5 service that makes first call at Savannah, adding a second Ocean Alliance service from the Indian subcontinent along with the current USEC3 service rotation. In addition, Ocean Alliance added Taiwan’s Kaohsiung as a backhaul on three West Coast trans-Pacific services, along with a westbound call to South Korea’s Busan. Chinese port rotations will also see small changes in the 2026 network. The southern China port of Yangpu, across the Beibu Gulf from Haiphong, will be added to the front-haul for the PSW9 and PNW2 services to the West Coast. Tianjin will also be added to the PSW5 service, while Hong Kong will be added to the PNW2 service. China’s Xiamen port will get a second service with a new call on the USEC4 service, adding to an existing call on the USEC2 service. But a previous Xiamen call on the USEC5 appears to have been dropped in favor of the new Haiphong call. Amid the ongoing sourcing shift away from China, container volumes from Southeast Asia to the US saw year-over-year gains in every month last year, with 10 of those months seeing double-digit gains, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Jacksonville gets Far East service Jacksonville this year will be on the rotation for Ocean Alliance’s USEC6 service that covers the US Gulf Coast. The USEC6 previously featured a call to New Orleans, but it’s not included in the 2026 network. While Jacksonville already has Asia services through the Premier Alliance, Mediterranean Shipping Co. and Zim Integrated Shipping, the Ocean Alliance has not been a regular caller to the port since 2019 when it dropped Jacksonville on the same service. Other US rotation changes include dropping Charleston from the USEC4 service, while keeping the port on rotation for three other Ocean Alliance services. The USEC4 will replace the Charleston call with a call to Baltimore, but that port will be dropped from the USEC5 service. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Ocean Alliance adding Vietnam calls to North America for 2026

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">As shippers realize that threats to service are not periodic but systemic, their focus on reliability will only intensify this year, writes Peter Tirschwell.</div>

As shippers realize that threats to service are not periodic but systemic, their focus on reliability will only intensify this year, writes Peter Tirschwell.

<div class="phx-topic">This year will not be marked by freight rates collapsing due to overcapacity and shippers weary from tariff costs reaping a windfall in ocean freight discounts. Despite the largest order book in history and volumes expected to slow globally, that is not the scenario coming into focus for the year ahead, even if widespread Red Sea transits resume. Rather, according to several sources in recent weeks, a different picture is emerging: Rates will likely moderate, perhaps by a few hundred dollars per container, and as shippers realize that threats to service are not periodic but systemic, their focus on reliability will only intensify this year. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6155383_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The year ahead, in other words, reflects long-term macro trends under way in containers: capacity tightening despite cyclicality due to infrastructure limitations and carrier actions to manage capacity, and shippers in response turning their focus away from rates and toward service to mitigate risk. “For 2026 as we move into this bid season, it won’t be all about the ocean rates,” Chantal McRoberts of Drewry Supply Chain Advisers told a recent Journal of Commerce webinar focused on Asia port congestion.  “We know that we’re in a more subdued demand environment. We know that the order book is large. We know that carriers are looking to secure volume, but the key to that is, what service are you providing? Shippers are definitely starting to factor that into their bid strategies,” she said. “The number one question that comes up from BCOs [beneficial cargo owners] is, putting the rates aside, I need a reliable provider or partner to work with. I still have to answer to the CFO. I still have to justify the cost, but I now also have to ensure that I'm procuring my ocean freight to deliver my product.” According to eeSea, ocean reliability from Asia to the US West Coast has ranged between 42% and 48% since September. <h3>China ‘lacking port capacity’ </h3>Port congestion in China is a case in point about shippers’ growing concerns about the integrity of supply chains.  Still the source of 36% of US imports in TEUs in 2025, (down from 40% in 2024), according to S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, the country is encountering chronic congestion at Shanghai and Ningbo, its two largest ports, where ships typically are waiting two to three days outside the port. The fundamental reason, according to Asia sources over the past two years, was that while China ambitiously built port capacity ahead of demand in the years after entering the World Trade Organization in 2001, expansion has slowed at a time when its exports are experiencing a growth spurt.  “I know it’s a shocker, and it feels unnatural to hear it, but China is lacking port capacity. It’s as simple as that,” Nils Roche, founder of Solvens Advisory and recently deputy head of operations at Singapore-based carrier PIL, said on the Journal of Commerce webinar. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="615c1430-acb8-4c73-9884-61992f08d1d3"></dynamic-object></div>Limited port capacity in China is being called upon to handle surging volumes growing out of a macro-China economic strategy to diversify away from the US and overcome weakness in other sectors such as real estate.  China in November surpassed the $1 trillion trade surplus barrier for the first time. Its share of global exports grew from 33% to 37% between 2023 and 2025, Maersk told investors in November. Influenced by export growth, S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence in November raised Mainland China’s GDP growth forecast for 2025–27 by a quarter point, to 5.0%, 4.6% and 4.5%, respectively. “The upward adjustments primarily reflect a more positive assessment of export prospects,” S&amp;P Global said. The intractable nature of port capacity limitations is further reflected in growing ship sizes and more containers needed to be moved per port call at ports that have not kept pace. “The ships that you have today, they are not the ships that we had 10 years ago. If you think about it, I used to operate Panamaxes, and they were the rock stars,” Roche said, noting his skepticism that technology-driven productivity improvements can meaningfully expand capacity. “Now you have 18,000, 24,000-TEU ships coming into the ports. A Panamax calling a port is a port call, a 24,000-TEU ship calling a port, it's a major event.” The difficulty ports have in handling the volumes and ship sizes being thrown at them is confirmed by port performance data. The S&amp;P Global Port Performance data is based on vessel turnaround time and normalized by workload, with underlying data provided by carriers — in other words, how many hours a ship is spending in port to achieve a certain move count. The data shows ports on a global basis are operating well below pre-pandemic levels of performance. Due to port capacity limitations, Roche says the industry should temper its expectations for the impact of a return to the Red Sea, if that occurs this year (although there is no guarantee it will).  He said that if the Red Sea opens up, “we should not expect a massive influx of capacity, simply because the lack of capacity, or the bottleneck if you prefer, will be transferred from the ocean to the land.” “I disagree with the narrative carried by analysts that shipping obeys 100% of the laws of supply and demand, and that more ships mean more supply ... it’s being half-blind to an entire ecosystem,” Roche said. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.Contact Peter Tirschwell at <a href="mailto:peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com">peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

This year will not be marked by freight rates collapsing due to overcapacity and shippers weary from tariff costs reaping a windfall in ocean freight discounts. Despite the largest order book in history and volumes expected to slow globally, that is not the scenario coming into focus for the year ahead, even if widespread Red Sea transits resume.  Rather, according to several sources in recent weeks, a different picture is emerging: Rates will likely moderate, perhaps by a few hundred dollars per container, and as shippers realize that threats to service are not periodic but systemic, their focus on reliability will only intensify this year. The year ahead, in other words, reflects long-term macro trends under way in containers: capacity tightening despite cyclicality due to infrastructure limitations and carrier actions to manage capacity, and shippers in response turning their focus away from rates and toward service to mitigate risk.  “For 2026 as we move into this bid season, it won’t be all about the ocean rates,” Chantal McRoberts of Drewry Supply Chain Advisers told a recent Journal of Commerce webinar focused on Asia port congestion.   “We know that we’re in a more subdued demand environment. We know that the order book is large. We know that carriers are looking to secure volume, but the key to that is, what service are you providing? Shippers are definitely starting to factor that into their bid strategies,” she said. “The number one question that comes up from BCOs [beneficial cargo owners] is, putting the rates aside, I need a reliable provider or partner to work with. I still have to answer to the CFO. I still have to justify the cost, but I now also have to ensure that I'm procuring my ocean freight to deliver my product.”  According to eeSea, ocean reliability from Asia to the US West Coast has ranged between 42% and 48% since September.  China ‘lacking port capacity’  Port congestion in China is a case in point about shippers’ growing concerns about the integrity of supply chains.   Still the source of 36% of US imports in TEUs in 2025, (down from 40% in 2024), according to S&P Global Market Intelligence, the country is encountering chronic congestion at Shanghai and Ningbo, its two largest ports, where ships typically are waiting two to three days outside the port.  The fundamental reason, according to Asia sources over the past two years, was that while China ambitiously built port capacity ahead of demand in the years after entering the World Trade Organization in 2001, expansion has slowed at a time when its exports are experiencing a growth spurt.   “I know it’s a shocker, and it feels unnatural to hear it, but China is lacking port capacity. It’s as simple as that,” Nils Roche, founder of Solvens Advisory and recently deputy head of operations at Singapore-based carrier PIL, said on the Journal of Commerce webinar. Limited port capacity in China is being called upon to handle surging volumes growing out of a macro-China economic strategy to diversify away from the US and overcome weakness in other sectors such as real estate.   China in November surpassed the $1 trillion trade surplus barrier for the first time. Its share of global exports grew from 33% to 37% between 2023 and 2025, Maersk told investors in November. Influenced by export growth, S&P Global Market Intelligence in November raised Mainland China’s GDP growth forecast for 2025–27 by a quarter point, to 5.0%, 4.6% and 4.5%, respectively. “The upward adjustments primarily reflect a more positive assessment of export prospects,” S&P Global said.  The intractable nature of port capacity limitations is further reflected in growing ship sizes and more containers needed to be moved per port call at ports that have not kept pace.  “The ships that you have today, they are not the ships that we had 10 years ago. If you think about it, I used to operate Panamaxes, and they were the rock stars,” Roche said, noting his skepticism that technology-driven productivity improvements can meaningfully expand capacity. “Now you have 18,000, 24,000-TEU ships coming into the ports. A Panamax calling a port is a port call, a 24,000-TEU ship calling a port, it's a major event.” The difficulty ports have in handling the volumes and ship sizes being thrown at them is confirmed by port performance data. The S&P Global Port Performance data is based on vessel turnaround time and normalized by workload, with underlying data provided by carriers — in other words, how many hours a ship is spending in port to achieve a certain move count. The data shows ports on a global basis are operating well below pre-pandemic levels of performance. Due to port capacity limitations, Roche says the industry should temper its expectations for the impact of a return to the Red Sea, if that occurs this year (although there is no guarantee it will).   He said that if the Red Sea opens up, “we should not expect a massive influx of capacity, simply because the lack of capacity, or the bottleneck if you prefer, will be transferred from the ocean to the land.”  “I disagree with the narrative carried by analysts that shipping obeys 100% of the laws of supply and demand, and that more ships mean more supply ... it’s being half-blind to an entire ecosystem,” Roche said.  S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.Contact Peter Tirschwell at peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com .

Revised Norfolk Southern merger application will be refiled in ‘weeks’: UP

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

CMA CGM backs off plans to resume Suez transits for Asia-Europe services

STB rejects UP-NS merger application as ‘incomplete’

Long Beach considering development of ‘conventional, zero-emissions' terminal: CEO

Recent Commentary

A few market predictions and some advice for BCOs as contract season heats up

Pace of freight market recovery a matter of ‘gradually, then suddenly’

Top 5 Most Read Stories