<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ports that previously had been able to count on more predictable planning and certain cargo types, such as wind project equipment, are finding themselves having to take stock of their capabilities and recalibrate accordingly. </div>

Ports that previously had been able to count on more predictable planning and certain cargo types, such as wind project equipment, are finding themselves having to take stock of their capabilities and recalibrate accordingly.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">With uncertainties stemming from tariffs, fees and shifting cargo demands, US ports are finding ways to pivot to new breakbulk and project cargo opportunities as they adapt to offset rapidly changing market conditions and domestic priorities. US ports are facing headwinds from tariffs the Trump administration has imposed on steel and aluminum imports, as well the confusion around the US Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) Section 301 action imposing fees on Chinese-owned and built ships docking in the US. Roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) ships and vehicle carriers were among the vessels affected by the fees, which took effect Oct. 14, although <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-china-suspend-reciprocal-port-fees-as-part-of-wider-trade-deal-6105849">a trade deal struck between the US and China on Oct. 30</a> included a one-year suspension of the fees, effective Nov. 10. Ports that previously had been able to count on more predictable planning and certain cargo types, such as wind project equipment, are finding themselves having to take stock of their capabilities and recalibrate accordingly. “It’s an ancient industry that’s being disturbed by a very rapid set of policy changes,” Ethan Murray, assistant operations manager for the New Hampshire Port Authority, told the Journal of Commerce. Murray said the past year has brought “turmoil” for cargo shippers and logistics agents when moving shipments to US ports. “Between the tariffs and the new sanctions on Chinese vessels, I’ve seen nothing but difficulty in landing cargoes,” he said. Murray cited one instance from over the summer, when a Baltimore-bound vessel carrying 14,000 tons of refined copper from Hamburg, Germany, was diverted to the Port of New Hampshire so the shipment could reach a US port a day or two before a 50% tariff on copper imports was set to take effect Aug. 1. However, shortly after the shipment reached New Hampshire and started unloading so the cargo could be trucked to Baltimore, the Trump administration signed a proclamation indicating that the Aug. 1 tariffs would not apply to certain types of copper — including the product in the shipment. So, the cargo went back on the ship, and the vessel sailed on to Baltimore instead. “So, there are real, additional costs that are being put on shippers,” Murray said. One upshot of these kinds of timing issues is that they have made smaller ports like New Hampshire more appealing for certain shipments. Murray said the port has been receiving cargoes that previously would have gone elsewhere, as shippers and logistics companies have sought out ways to avoid tariffs and minimize costs. “Typically, we’re cheaper than some of the larger ports for our dockage and wharfage fees,” he said. “There’s a lot of free space and availability, versus some of the higher-volume terminals and ports.” But the tradeoff for these opportunities is uncertainty and an operating environment in which it’s difficult to make plans. Murray said the port might receive an inquiry from a shipper, only to receive a last-minute notice that the cargo is heading somewhere else instead — or delayed indefinitely. “They’ll say, ‘We’ll delay it until next year,’ or three or four years out, in some cases,” he said. “Just wait out (the Trump) administration.” <h3>LNG, Meta signal project cargo windfall </h3>Janine Mansour, director of trade development for the Port of New Orleans, told the Journal of Commerce there’s been a sense of “pervasive uncertainty” across the industry when it comes to cargo planning. “It’s so difficult because of the market environment being so dynamic,” she said. “Things can change very quickly.” Mansour said the port has been courting more project cargo, as “market fluctuations” contributed to a double-digit decline in breakbulk volumes in New Orleans for the first nine months of the year. Volumes fell 15% to 1.1 million tons through September compared to the same period in 2024, according to port data. Container cargo tonnage, by comparison, rose 2% to 240,482 TEUs. Mansour said the breakbulk decline was largely driven by a decrease in raw materials, including steel, non-ferrous metals and rubber. “So, we have gone after project cargo activities more aggressively, and fortunately, we’re getting some good traction in the state,” she said. Pointing to a “healthy market” for heavy-lift cargo related to US manufacturing investments, Mansour cited the $5.8 billion steel mill that Hyundai plans to build along the Mississippi River in southeast Louisiana as a project that will generate significant cargo opportunities during construction, which is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2026. Mansour said the single-largest project driving heavy-lift cargo to the port has been Venture Global’s $28 billion CP2 LNG export project on the Gulf Coast of southwest Louisiana. Another equally massive project is the $27 billion data center Meta is building in northeast Louisiana. Construction for the 4-million-square-foot facility, Meta’s largest data center to date, began in December 2024 and is expected to continue through 2030. Mansour said the Port of New Orleans has been working closely with its two heavy-lift terminal operators, Ports America and QSL, to plan for the port’s involvement in handling the data center’s project cargo. Several investments in Louisiana projects to support electric vehicle (EV) battery production have been another bright spot for the New Orleans port, Mansour said. “While we haven’t seen a huge volume of freight yet, we’re having discussions with the companies about setting up their logistics through New Orleans,” she said. <h3>Virginia adapts heavy-lift strategy </h3>Wind project cargo has tapered off at New Orleans in recent years as shipments are trending more toward oil rig platforms and construction related to liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects. “Wind was pretty strong for us for several years, but for the past few years we have not seen much in the onshore wind space,” Mansour said. Other US ports have begun to mirror that trend following the pullback on federal funding and permitting for US wind projects, coinciding with policies and investments aimed at ramping up domestic oil and gas production. The stalled development of the US wind industry has been especially pronounced for East Coast ports, several of which had been handling project cargo for the buildout of offshore wind farms in the Atlantic Ocean. Murray said he’s had conversations with representatives of other coastal ports who are exploring new cargo strategies now that multiple offshore wind projects are off the table. “Everyone who really leaned that way has, for the most part, come to regret it,” he said. As cargoes shift from wind and solar to oil and gas, some ports are using the opportunity to pivot. Offshore wind development has seeded new opportunities for the Port of Virginia, which is using the ongoing Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project Dominion Energy is developing in the mid-Atlantic as an opportunity to prove its heavy-lift capabilities and improve its infrastructure for larger and heavier cargo types. Virginia Port Authority (VPA) spokesperson Joe Harris told the Journal of Commerce that the 2.6-gigawatt (GW) CVOW project — the largest offshore wind farm in the US — has helped the port lay the groundwork for future heavy-lift business, offshore wind project cargo notwithstanding. “The thinking around offshore wind has shifted, and that means we may have to shift as well going forward,” Harris said. Harris said the Port of Virginia has had conversations with US shipbuilders about using the Newport News Marine Terminal — the port’s main breakbulk and ro/ro facility — as a laydown area for ship components. “We would not be having this discussion with the domestic shipbuilding industry if we didn’t have the experience that we’ve gained with offshore wind,” he said. “Having the heavy-lift capability really helps us diversity, and it serves as a hedge when cargo container volumes are soft,” Harris added. Activity from the CVOW project drove up breakbulk cargo volumes at the Port of Virginia to 57,909 tons in September, a 157% year-over-year increase, he said. Construction of the CVOW project is about 60% complete and on track to wrap up in late 2026, with the wind farm set to start delivering power to the grid in the first quarter of 2026, Dominion spokesperson Jeremy Slayton told the Journal of Commerce. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>. </div>

With uncertainties stemming from tariffs, fees and shifting cargo demands, US ports are finding ways to pivot to new breakbulk and project cargo opportunities as they adapt to offset rapidly changing market conditions and domestic priorities. US ports are facing headwinds from tariffs the Trump administration has imposed on steel and aluminum imports, as well the confusion around the US Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) Section 301 action imposing fees on Chinese-owned and built ships docking in the US. Roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) ships and vehicle carriers were among the vessels affected by the fees, which took effect Oct. 14, although a trade deal struck between the US and China on Oct. 30 included a one-year suspension of the fees, effective Nov. 10. Ports that previously had been able to count on more predictable planning and certain cargo types, such as wind project equipment, are finding themselves having to take stock of their capabilities and recalibrate accordingly. “It’s an ancient industry that’s being disturbed by a very rapid set of policy changes,” Ethan Murray, assistant operations manager for the New Hampshire Port Authority, told the Journal of Commerce. Murray said the past year has brought “turmoil” for cargo shippers and logistics agents when moving shipments to US ports. “Between the tariffs and the new sanctions on Chinese vessels, I’ve seen nothing but difficulty in landing cargoes,” he said. Murray cited one instance from over the summer, when a Baltimore-bound vessel carrying 14,000 tons of refined copper from Hamburg, Germany, was diverted to the Port of New Hampshire so the shipment could reach a US port a day or two before a 50% tariff on copper imports was set to take effect Aug. 1. However, shortly after the shipment reached New Hampshire and started unloading so the cargo could be trucked to Baltimore, the Trump administration signed a proclamation indicating that the Aug. 1 tariffs would not apply to certain types of copper — including the product in the shipment. So, the cargo went back on the ship, and the vessel sailed on to Baltimore instead. “So, there are real, additional costs that are being put on shippers,” Murray said. One upshot of these kinds of timing issues is that they have made smaller ports like New Hampshire more appealing for certain shipments. Murray said the port has been receiving cargoes that previously would have gone elsewhere, as shippers and logistics companies have sought out ways to avoid tariffs and minimize costs. “Typically, we’re cheaper than some of the larger ports for our dockage and wharfage fees,” he said. “There’s a lot of free space and availability, versus some of the higher-volume terminals and ports.” But the tradeoff for these opportunities is uncertainty and an operating environment in which it’s difficult to make plans. Murray said the port might receive an inquiry from a shipper, only to receive a last-minute notice that the cargo is heading somewhere else instead — or delayed indefinitely. “They’ll say, ‘We’ll delay it until next year,’ or three or four years out, in some cases,” he said. “Just wait out (the Trump) administration.” LNG, Meta signal project cargo windfall Janine Mansour, director of trade development for the Port of New Orleans, told the Journal of Commerce there’s been a sense of “pervasive uncertainty” across the industry when it comes to cargo planning. “It’s so difficult because of the market environment being so dynamic,” she said. “Things can change very quickly.” Mansour said the port has been courting more project cargo, as “market fluctuations” contributed to a double-digit decline in breakbulk volumes in New Orleans for the first nine months of the year. Volumes fell 15% to 1.1 million tons through September compared to the same period in 2024, according to port data. Container cargo tonnage, by comparison, rose 2% to 240,482 TEUs. Mansour said the breakbulk decline was largely driven by a decrease in raw materials, including steel, non-ferrous metals and rubber. “So, we have gone after project cargo activities more aggressively, and fortunately, we’re getting some good traction in the state,” she said. Pointing to a “healthy market” for heavy-lift cargo related to US manufacturing investments, Mansour cited the $5.8 billion steel mill that Hyundai plans to build along the Mississippi River in southeast Louisiana as a project that will generate significant cargo opportunities during construction, which is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2026. Mansour said the single-largest project driving heavy-lift cargo to the port has been Venture Global’s $28 billion CP2 LNG export project on the Gulf Coast of southwest Louisiana. Another equally massive project is the $27 billion data center Meta is building in northeast Louisiana. Construction for the 4-million-square-foot facility, Meta’s largest data center to date, began in December 2024 and is expected to continue through 2030. Mansour said the Port of New Orleans has been working closely with its two heavy-lift terminal operators, Ports America and QSL, to plan for the port’s involvement in handling the data center’s project cargo. Several investments in Louisiana projects to support electric vehicle (EV) battery production have been another bright spot for the New Orleans port, Mansour said. “While we haven’t seen a huge volume of freight yet, we’re having discussions with the companies about setting up their logistics through New Orleans,” she said. Virginia adapts heavy-lift strategy Wind project cargo has tapered off at New Orleans in recent years as shipments are trending more toward oil rig platforms and construction related to liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects. “Wind was pretty strong for us for several years, but for the past few years we have not seen much in the onshore wind space,” Mansour said. Other US ports have begun to mirror that trend following the pullback on federal funding and permitting for US wind projects, coinciding with policies and investments aimed at ramping up domestic oil and gas production. The stalled development of the US wind industry has been especially pronounced for East Coast ports, several of which had been handling project cargo for the buildout of offshore wind farms in the Atlantic Ocean. Murray said he’s had conversations with representatives of other coastal ports who are exploring new cargo strategies now that multiple offshore wind projects are off the table. “Everyone who really leaned that way has, for the most part, come to regret it,” he said. As cargoes shift from wind and solar to oil and gas, some ports are using the opportunity to pivot. Offshore wind development has seeded new opportunities for the Port of Virginia, which is using the ongoing Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project Dominion Energy is developing in the mid-Atlantic as an opportunity to prove its heavy-lift capabilities and improve its infrastructure for larger and heavier cargo types. Virginia Port Authority (VPA) spokesperson Joe Harris told the Journal of Commerce that the 2.6-gigawatt (GW) CVOW project — the largest offshore wind farm in the US — has helped the port lay the groundwork for future heavy-lift business, offshore wind project cargo notwithstanding. “The thinking around offshore wind has shifted, and that means we may have to shift as well going forward,” Harris said. Harris said the Port of Virginia has had conversations with US shipbuilders about using the Newport News Marine Terminal — the port’s main breakbulk and ro/ro facility — as a laydown area for ship components. “We would not be having this discussion with the domestic shipbuilding industry if we didn’t have the experience that we’ve gained with offshore wind,” he said. “Having the heavy-lift capability really helps us diversity, and it serves as a hedge when cargo container volumes are soft,” Harris added. Activity from the CVOW project drove up breakbulk cargo volumes at the Port of Virginia to 57,909 tons in September, a 157% year-over-year increase, he said. Construction of the CVOW project is about 60% complete and on track to wrap up in late 2026, with the wind farm set to start delivering power to the grid in the first quarter of 2026, Dominion spokesperson Jeremy Slayton told the Journal of Commerce. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Ro/ro cargo

Heavy-haul transport

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Maritime

Tariffs, energy policy changes force US ports to rethink project cargo strategies

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But the revision comes as the carrier saw sharp declines in third-quarter revenues and profit amid the slump in freight rates.</div>

But the revision comes as the carrier saw sharp declines in third-quarter revenues and profit amid the slump in freight rates.

<div class="phx-topic">Maersk on Thursday raised the lower end of its full-year earnings guidance, citing resilient cargo demand despite a slump in container freight rates. But the revision came as the carrier saw sharp declines in third-quarter revenues and profit amid the softer freight rates. Maersk said global container volume growth is now forecast at 4% this year, up from a prior forecast of 2% and 4%. As a result, Maersk’s full-year earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) is now forecast at between $9 billion and $9.5 billion, up from $8 billion to $9.5 billion projected in August. And underlying earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) is projected at between $3 billion to $3.5 billion, up from $2 billion to $3.5 billion. But the revised guidance came as Maersk unveiled mixed third-quarter results, with net profit in its liner division crashing on the lower freight rates despite the increase in volumes, while its terminals and logistics divisions saw revenue gains. Maersk said loaded volumes, driven by Asian exports, climbed 7% in the third quarter to 3.4 million TEUs, up from 3.2 million TEUs in the year-earlier period. But the company was hit by a drop in average loaded freight rates, which were 31% lower across most trades as the high rates seen in July had declined by the end of the quarter. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="633d74d4-3e57-4d30-9b26-c9b52f6efb5c"></dynamic-object></div>According to the World Container Index (WCI) as assessed by Drewry, average global container spot rates had fallen from a July 1 peak of $5,806 per FEU to $1,822 as of Oct. 1. Volumes handled by APM Terminals rose 8.7% year on year to 3.7 million TEUs in Q3, fueled by strong growth across the Americas, Europe and Africa. The gain was driven by the bounce in cargo through its terminal network after Maersk Line launched the Gemini Cooperation alliance with Hapag-Lloyd in February. <h3>Slump in freight rates hits ocean division earnings </h3>Overall, A.P. Moller – Maersk saw net profit drop by 67% to $1 billion in the third quarter, while revenue fell 10% to $14.2 billion. The slump in freight rates led to an 18% fall in revenue at Maersk’s ocean division, to $9.2 billion, despite the higher loaded volumes. EBITDA more than halved to $1.8 billion from $4 billion. Revenue at Maersk’s terminals division surged 22% in Q3 to $1.4 billion on the back of high volumes, while the logistics division posted a 2% increase in revenue to $4 billion. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com.</a></div>

Maersk on Thursday raised the lower end of its full-year earnings guidance, citing resilient cargo demand despite a slump in container freight rates. But the revision came as the carrier saw sharp declines in third-quarter revenues and profit amid the softer freight rates. Maersk said global container volume growth is now forecast at 4% this year, up from a prior forecast of 2% and 4%. As a result, Maersk’s full-year earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) is now forecast at between $9 billion and $9.5 billion, up from $8 billion to $9.5 billion projected in August. And underlying earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) is projected at between $3 billion to $3.5 billion, up from $2 billion to $3.5 billion. But the revised guidance came as Maersk unveiled mixed third-quarter results, with net profit in its liner division crashing on the lower freight rates despite the increase in volumes, while its terminals and logistics divisions saw revenue gains. Maersk said loaded volumes, driven by Asian exports, climbed 7% in the third quarter to 3.4 million TEUs, up from 3.2 million TEUs in the year-earlier period. But the company was hit by a drop in average loaded freight rates, which were 31% lower across most trades as the high rates seen in July had declined by the end of the quarter. According to the World Container Index (WCI) as assessed by Drewry, average global container spot rates had fallen from a July 1 peak of $5,806 per FEU to $1,822 as of Oct. 1. Volumes handled by APM Terminals rose 8.7% year on year to 3.7 million TEUs in Q3, fueled by strong growth across the Americas, Europe and Africa. The gain was driven by the bounce in cargo through its terminal network after Maersk Line launched the Gemini Cooperation alliance with Hapag-Lloyd in February. Slump in freight rates hits ocean division earnings Overall, A.P. Moller – Maersk saw net profit drop by 67% to $1 billion in the third quarter, while revenue fell 10% to $14.2 billion. The slump in freight rates led to an 18% fall in revenue at Maersk’s ocean division, to $9.2 billion, despite the higher loaded volumes. EBITDA more than halved to $1.8 billion from $4 billion. Revenue at Maersk’s terminals division surged 22% in Q3 to $1.4 billion on the back of high volumes, while the logistics division posted a 2% increase in revenue to $4 billion. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com.

Container lines

Container Shipping News

Maersk boosts earnings guidance on higher container volume growth

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">With calculations based on weight, the burden of CO2 emissions generated by passenger aircraft is being unfairly placed on the freight carried below decks, forwarders say. </div>

With calculations based on weight, the burden of CO2 emissions generated by passenger aircraft is being unfairly placed on the freight carried below decks, forwarders say.

<div class="phx-topic">ABU DHABI — The air cargo market is facing difficulties managing how CO2 emissions are calculated and apportioned between freighter aircraft and the bellies of passenger planes. With the calculations based on weight, forwarder DSV told delegates at The International Air Cargo Association’s (Tiaca’s) annual Air Cargo Forum that the burden of CO2 emissions being generated by passenger aircraft was unfairly placed on the freight being carried below decks. “Passengers with their weight and space around them occupy 80% of an aircraft and cargo 20%, but because cargo is denser and uses all available space, the weight might be 50:50,” Achim Martinka, DSV’s vice president of global air freight, commercial and sustainability, said Wednesday. “Under the current calculation methods by IATA [International Air Transport Association], the total CO2 generated by that passenger aircraft will be 50:50, so cargo must shoulder a bigger proportion of the CO2 costs despite only using 20% of the aircraft and utilizing the space far more efficiently than passengers,” Martinka said. With regulations in Europe putting a price on carbon under the EU emissions trading system, “we are not talking small numbers,” he said. “If you are moving 100 tons from Paris to Chicago it might be a 40% difference between using a freighter or a passenger plane,” Martinka said. “With the current calculation methodology, if a shipper wanted to lower his CO2 footprint, one of the many options we could suggest would be to send cargo on a freighter instead of belly cargo.” <h3>Weight-based measure ‘not perfect’ </h3>Brendan Sullivan, global head of cargo at IATA, said the CO2 calculation uses a weight-based allocation principle to share total flight emissions. The industry standard allocates a proportional share of the total CO2 emissions to freight and passengers based on their respective weight, including checked baggage. “It is not perfect — there is no perfect methodology for this — but it is a transparent and an industry-wide standardized way to calculate CO2 emissions,” Sullivan told the Journal of Commerce at the Tiaca event. “In the future we will be able to refine the transparency and ultimately drive reduced emissions.” Sullivan noted that assessing carbon emissions from freighters was a straightforward process, with fuel burn directly corresponding to the weight of the cargo and aircraft. Helene Goury, sustainability manager at Air France KLM Martinair Cargo, said airlines were aware of the challenge faced by shippers and were looking at ways to make the CO2 calculations fairer. “One of the barriers to make sure we compare and measure in the same way is the data, because a lot of decisions are being made based on data, and if the data is not right, how can we make the right decision?” she said. “It is a challenge we are trying to solve, and it is taking time because it is not an easy task.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

ABU DHABI — The air cargo market is facing difficulties managing how CO2 emissions are calculated and apportioned between freighter aircraft and the bellies of passenger planes. With the calculations based on weight, forwarder DSV told delegates at The International Air Cargo Association’s (Tiaca’s) annual Air Cargo Forum that the burden of CO2 emissions being generated by passenger aircraft was unfairly placed on the freight being carried below decks. “Passengers with their weight and space around them occupy 80% of an aircraft and cargo 20%, but because cargo is denser and uses all available space, the weight might be 50:50,” Achim Martinka, DSV’s vice president of global air freight, commercial and sustainability, said Wednesday. “Under the current calculation methods by IATA [International Air Transport Association], the total CO2 generated by that passenger aircraft will be 50:50, so cargo must shoulder a bigger proportion of the CO2 costs despite only using 20% of the aircraft and utilizing the space far more efficiently than passengers,” Martinka said. With regulations in Europe putting a price on carbon under the EU emissions trading system, “we are not talking small numbers,” he said. “If you are moving 100 tons from Paris to Chicago it might be a 40% difference between using a freighter or a passenger plane,” Martinka said. “With the current calculation methodology, if a shipper wanted to lower his CO2 footprint, one of the many options we could suggest would be to send cargo on a freighter instead of belly cargo.” Weight-based measure ‘not perfect’ Brendan Sullivan, global head of cargo at IATA, said the CO2 calculation uses a weight-based allocation principle to share total flight emissions. The industry standard allocates a proportional share of the total CO2 emissions to freight and passengers based on their respective weight, including checked baggage. “It is not perfect — there is no perfect methodology for this — but it is a transparent and an industry-wide standardized way to calculate CO2 emissions,” Sullivan told the Journal of Commerce at the Tiaca event. “In the future we will be able to refine the transparency and ultimately drive reduced emissions.” Sullivan noted that assessing carbon emissions from freighters was a straightforward process, with fuel burn directly corresponding to the weight of the cargo and aircraft. Helene Goury, sustainability manager at Air France KLM Martinair Cargo, said airlines were aware of the challenge faced by shippers and were looking at ways to make the CO2 calculations fairer. “One of the barriers to make sure we compare and measure in the same way is the data, because a lot of decisions are being made based on data, and if the data is not right, how can we make the right decision?” she said. “It is a challenge we are trying to solve, and it is taking time because it is not an easy task.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Air Cargo Carriers News

Air Cargo

Belly freight shouldering airlines’ CO2 emissions burden: forwarders

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Jones Act carrier said pricing for expedited ocean freight stayed firm in the quarter despite lower overall volumes from China amid the trade dispute between Washington and Beijing. </div>

The Jones Act carrier said pricing for expedited ocean freight stayed firm in the quarter despite lower overall volumes from China amid the trade dispute between Washington and Beijing.

<div class="phx-topic">Matson on Wednesday reported third-quarter results well above expectations as premium pricing for expedited trans-Pacific freight offset lower volumes out of China. The Jones Act carrier posted third-quarter earnings of $4.24 per share on total revenues of $880.1 million, which were down 28% and 8%, respectively, from the year-earlier quarter. But the results were much better than analyst estimates of $3.25 per share and $837 million, according to S&amp;P Global Capital IQ Estimates. Despite a 12.8% drop in China container volumes during the period and a weaker spot freight market in the trans-Pacific, Matson Chief Executive Matt Cox said the carrier mostly held the line on premium pricing for its expedited services. While its overall vessel utilization had been hovering near 70% due to the US-China trade dispute, Cox said during an earnings call that dropping Matson’s rates was not likely to induce more demand. “The actions that are happening on [trans-Pacific] pricing now are really having zero impact on Matson’s pricing,” he said. “We really are pricing on a totally different threshold, which is the customer who has cargo that needs to move fast, whether it’s a late production or whether it’s unforecasted demand.” Cox, meanwhile, said Matson <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/china-returns-fire-with-retaliatory-port-fees-targeting-us-affiliated-ships-6095198">has paid $6.4 million in port fees to China that began Oct. 14</a> but will be suspended under terms <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/year-long-pause-on-us-port-fees-targeting-china-vessels-to-start-nov-10-6108431">of the broad trade agreement announced last week</a> between Washington and Beijing. Cox said the carrier was looking at an additional cost of $80 million per year without the truce. While Matson declined to pass the fee onto its customers, it’s unclear whether there will be a refund mechanism, Cox said, adding that he expects a determination on that in the next week or two. <h3>More volumes coming from other countries </h3>Matson, which added a feeder service from Vietnam to its mainline trans-Pacific services, is starting to see more volumes coming out of the country, Cox said. He added Vietnam accounts for about one in five containers on its expedited services, with other Southeast Asian countries expected to also add more volumes as shippers switch sourcing. “We also see cargo moving from Cambodia over the border to our Ho Chi Minh City service,” Cox said. “We’re also seeing cargo come out of Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines. We do expect Thailand and other origins to continue to grow as we transition into 2026 and beyond.” On the Jones Act side of its business, Matson saw 4% volume growth in the Alaska trade. Cox said the carrier had one additional sailing on its Alaska service during the third quarter, and the state itself is doing well economically, supporting the retail trade. Matson’s Hawaii business only saw modest growth amid slowing tourism and lackluster economic growth. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Matson on Wednesday reported third-quarter results well above expectations as premium pricing for expedited trans-Pacific freight offset lower volumes out of China. The Jones Act carrier posted third-quarter earnings of $4.24 per share on total revenues of $880.1 million, which were down 28% and 8%, respectively, from the year-earlier quarter. But the results were much better than analyst estimates of $3.25 per share and $837 million, according to S&P Global Capital IQ Estimates. Despite a 12.8% drop in China container volumes during the period and a weaker spot freight market in the trans-Pacific, Matson Chief Executive Matt Cox said the carrier mostly held the line on premium pricing for its expedited services. While its overall vessel utilization had been hovering near 70% due to the US-China trade dispute, Cox said during an earnings call that dropping Matson’s rates was not likely to induce more demand. “The actions that are happening on [trans-Pacific] pricing now are really having zero impact on Matson’s pricing,” he said. “We really are pricing on a totally different threshold, which is the customer who has cargo that needs to move fast, whether it’s a late production or whether it’s unforecasted demand.” Cox, meanwhile, said Matson has paid $6.4 million in port fees to China that began Oct. 14 but will be suspended under terms of the broad trade agreement announced last week between Washington and Beijing. Cox said the carrier was looking at an additional cost of $80 million per year without the truce. While Matson declined to pass the fee onto its customers, it’s unclear whether there will be a refund mechanism, Cox said, adding that he expects a determination on that in the next week or two. More volumes coming from other countries Matson, which added a feeder service from Vietnam to its mainline trans-Pacific services, is starting to see more volumes coming out of the country, Cox said. He added Vietnam accounts for about one in five containers on its expedited services, with other Southeast Asian countries expected to also add more volumes as shippers switch sourcing. “We also see cargo moving from Cambodia over the border to our Ho Chi Minh City service,” Cox said. “We’re also seeing cargo come out of Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines. We do expect Thailand and other origins to continue to grow as we transition into 2026 and beyond.” On the Jones Act side of its business, Matson saw 4% volume growth in the Alaska trade. Cox said the carrier had one additional sailing on its Alaska service during the third quarter, and the state itself is doing well economically, supporting the retail trade. Matson’s Hawaii business only saw modest growth amid slowing tourism and lackluster economic growth. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Trans-Pacific

Matson Q3 results beat expectations despite weak trans-Pacific market

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">LTL carriers are reining in capital spending on property, holding new terminals and doors in reserve as they await a hoped-for turnaround in freight demand in 2026. </div>

LTL carriers are reining in capital spending on property, holding new terminals and doors in reserve as they await a hoped-for turnaround in freight demand in 2026.

<div class="phx-topic">The less-than-truckload (LTL) land rush in the US is nearing its end as bankrupt Yellow runs out of terminals to sell and potential buyers run out of freight to fill them. Despite the sale of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/yellow-terminal-auction-redrawing-us-ltl-map-as-pricing-surge-subsides-5222598">hundreds of properties</a> and the construction of many new terminals over the last two years, the LTL sector still has less capacity than it did before Yellow’s collapse in 2023. That capacity shortfall has supported higher LTL pricing. The US long-distance LTL producer price index, a measure of all-inclusive pricing, was up 10.5% year over year in August, before the US government shutdown. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="b8bff0bb-e602-4052-88a8-7955d25f97d2"></dynamic-object></div>“If you look at pre-Yellow and post-Yellow, the number of doors is down about 6%,” Mario Harik, XPO CEO, told the Journal of Commerce. “The number of terminals is down by a similar amount.” Compared with 2020, however, LTL capacity is down about 10%, Harik said. Demand for LTL freight services, however, is dropping, too, with publicly-owned LTL carriers reporting a year-over-year <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/top-ltl-carriers-maintain-profit-while-planning-paths-to-freight-recovery-6105968">decline in daily shipments</a>. A bleak freight outlook has carriers putting network expansion plans on hold, or at least slowing them down. “We haven’t opened any service centers this year,” Adam Satterfield, CFO of Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL), told analysts during a third-quarter earnings call last week. That’s a unique statement coming from an LTL executive. ODFL — the second-largest US LTL provider ranked by revenue — was one of the few large LTL carriers to abstain from the rush to buy terminals from bankrupt Yellow in 2023 and 2024. “I think we’ve opened six service centers going back to the end of 2022, so we definitely have built up some capacity,” Satterfield said. In contrast, Saia has opened 39 terminals since 2022 and 17 in the past year, most of them purchased from Yellow. Estes Express Lines purchased 37 owned and leased terminals from Yellow since 2022, and XPO acquired 28 Yellow terminals. Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings, R+L Carriers, ArcBest’s ABF Freight System, Central Transport, Pitt Ohio, A. Duie Pyle and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ltl-carriers-expanding-us-networks-despite-low-freight-demand-6053685">Roadrunner</a> all joined the real estate rush. That rush has now slowed to a trickle. Yellow had four carrier subsidiaries with 308 terminals at the end of 2022. Through partnerships with Ducera and CBRE, Yellow reached out to approximately 650 potential buyers and entered nondisclosure agreements with 400 of them, according to court filings. As of October, the company had just eight facilities left, according to bankruptcy court filings, including a 426-door facility in Chicago Heights, Illinois. ArcBest purchased an 18-door Montgomery, Alabama, terminal from Yellow in October for $375,000, and three other facilities were acquired by real estate developers. <h3>Slowing down </h3>Yellow’s bankruptcy was the opportunity of a generation for competitors that had plenty of cash but were hemmed in when it came to property needed to expand. “Our nationwide footprint allows us to build deeper relationships with customers, and we’re seeing the benefit of the investments made in our network,” Saia President and CEO Frederick Holzgrefe said during an earnings call last week. Saia’s new terminals have contributed a proportionally greater share of freight than its existing properties and likely helped Saia limit its year-over-year decline in daily shipment volume to 1.9% in the third quarter. And its expansion isn’t done, CFO Matthew Batteh said during the call. “We still have opportunities and dots we need to put on the map,” he said. But Saia sees slow growth ahead, and that will temper its expectations for expansion. “We’re slowing capital investment ... and making sure we’re in a position to take advantage of the opportunities that will inevitably be there for us,” Holzgrefe said. Knight-Swift, which leaped into the LTL market in 2021 with the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/knight-swift-combining-ltl-subsidiaries-to-form-one-carrier-under-act-brand-6102388">purchase of AAA Cooper Transportation</a> and purchased more than 25 terminals from Yellow, opened one new service center in the third quarter and replaced two smaller sites with larger facilities. “We still feel very encouraged that we’ll see growth in our existing network that we have without opening many properties here in the near term,” CEO Adam Miller said last week. ODFL is holding some planned terminals and capacity “in reserve,” said Satterfield. “We just think it’s more appropriate to hold them out versus increasing the number of service centers in operation, which increases line-haul expense, weakens your density even further and puts more pressure on the costs,” he told analysts. But Satterfield also believes there is less LTL capacity available today, even with excess capacity running as high as 30% in ODFL’s network. “I think what we know was a capacity-constrained environment in 2022 will be even more capacity constrained when we do eventually get into the upcycle,” he said. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The less-than-truckload (LTL) land rush in the US is nearing its end as bankrupt Yellow runs out of terminals to sell and potential buyers run out of freight to fill them. Despite the sale of hundreds of properties and the construction of many new terminals over the last two years, the LTL sector still has less capacity than it did before Yellow’s collapse in 2023. That capacity shortfall has supported higher LTL pricing. The US long-distance LTL producer price index, a measure of all-inclusive pricing, was up 10.5% year over year in August, before the US government shutdown. “If you look at pre-Yellow and post-Yellow, the number of doors is down about 6%,” Mario Harik, XPO CEO, told the Journal of Commerce. “The number of terminals is down by a similar amount.” Compared with 2020, however, LTL capacity is down about 10%, Harik said. Demand for LTL freight services, however, is dropping, too, with publicly-owned LTL carriers reporting a year-over-year decline in daily shipments . A bleak freight outlook has carriers putting network expansion plans on hold, or at least slowing them down. “We haven’t opened any service centers this year,” Adam Satterfield, CFO of Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL), told analysts during a third-quarter earnings call last week. That’s a unique statement coming from an LTL executive. ODFL — the second-largest US LTL provider ranked by revenue — was one of the few large LTL carriers to abstain from the rush to buy terminals from bankrupt Yellow in 2023 and 2024. “I think we’ve opened six service centers going back to the end of 2022, so we definitely have built up some capacity,” Satterfield said. In contrast, Saia has opened 39 terminals since 2022 and 17 in the past year, most of them purchased from Yellow. Estes Express Lines purchased 37 owned and leased terminals from Yellow since 2022, and XPO acquired 28 Yellow terminals. Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings, R+L Carriers, ArcBest’s ABF Freight System, Central Transport, Pitt Ohio, A. Duie Pyle and Roadrunner all joined the real estate rush. That rush has now slowed to a trickle. Yellow had four carrier subsidiaries with 308 terminals at the end of 2022. Through partnerships with Ducera and CBRE, Yellow reached out to approximately 650 potential buyers and entered nondisclosure agreements with 400 of them, according to court filings. As of October, the company had just eight facilities left, according to bankruptcy court filings, including a 426-door facility in Chicago Heights, Illinois. ArcBest purchased an 18-door Montgomery, Alabama, terminal from Yellow in October for $375,000, and three other facilities were acquired by real estate developers. Slowing down Yellow’s bankruptcy was the opportunity of a generation for competitors that had plenty of cash but were hemmed in when it came to property needed to expand. “Our nationwide footprint allows us to build deeper relationships with customers, and we’re seeing the benefit of the investments made in our network,” Saia President and CEO Frederick Holzgrefe said during an earnings call last week. Saia’s new terminals have contributed a proportionally greater share of freight than its existing properties and likely helped Saia limit its year-over-year decline in daily shipment volume to 1.9% in the third quarter. And its expansion isn’t done, CFO Matthew Batteh said during the call. “We still have opportunities and dots we need to put on the map,” he said. But Saia sees slow growth ahead, and that will temper its expectations for expansion. “We’re slowing capital investment ... and making sure we’re in a position to take advantage of the opportunities that will inevitably be there for us,” Holzgrefe said. Knight-Swift, which leaped into the LTL market in 2021 with the purchase of AAA Cooper Transportation and purchased more than 25 terminals from Yellow, opened one new service center in the third quarter and replaced two smaller sites with larger facilities. “We still feel very encouraged that we’ll see growth in our existing network that we have without opening many properties here in the near term,” CEO Adam Miller said last week. ODFL is holding some planned terminals and capacity “in reserve,” said Satterfield. “We just think it’s more appropriate to hold them out versus increasing the number of service centers in operation, which increases line-haul expense, weakens your density even further and puts more pressure on the costs,” he told analysts. But Satterfield also believes there is less LTL capacity available today, even with excess capacity running as high as 30% in ODFL’s network. “I think what we know was a capacity-constrained environment in 2022 will be even more capacity constrained when we do eventually get into the upcycle,” he said. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Surface

US LTL ‘land rush’ reaches its end amid long-term freight decline

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Shippers Linde and Air Liquide are leaning on their project backlogs for future cargoes, bucking talk of an “industrial recession.” </div>

Shippers Linde and Air Liquide are leaning on their project backlogs for future cargoes, bucking talk of an “industrial recession.”

<div class="phx-topic">The two largest global industrial gas suppliers are leveraging investments in US projects to offset sluggish industrial activity worldwide and ongoing market uncertainties going into the last quarter of the fiscal year. In their latest earnings remarks, suppliers Linde and Air Liquide pointed to continued challenges from turbulent market conditions and currency fluctuations while looking to their project backlogs as signs of future growth. Considered companies that serve as indicators of industrial market trends, Linde and Air Liquide are key providers of breakbulk and project cargo. The companies supply shipments such as gas storage tanks and heavy equipment for large industrial projects in industries including manufacturing, chemicals and steel production. Despite an ongoing global “industrial recession,” a $10 billion project backlog is driving optimism for long-term prospects at Linde, the world’s largest industrial gas supplier, CEO Sanjiv Lamba said during the company’s third-quarter earnings call on Oct. 31. The company is also exploring US steel and metal projects and facility expansions that could create greater gas demand. “We find ourselves positioned with the right players who are contemplating that expansion,” Lamba said. Manufacturing was the company’s fastest-growing industrial market for the US-German company in the third quarter, with growth being the most pronounced in the United States. “We seem to have lapped some of the tariff concerns, and this has translated into a healthy uptick in manufacturing activity,” Lamba said. Global sales rose 3% year over year to $8.6 billion for the quarter despite “stagnant industrial activity,” Lamba said. The Americas accounted for 72% of Linde’s $10 billion project backlog, which remained flat from a year ago. Sales in the Americas grew 3% to $3.8 billion for the quarter. Lamba said Linde remains guarded about any near-term recovery from a global “industrial recession.” Industrial sectors — including manufacturing, chemicals, energy, and metals and mining — accounted for 54% of the company’s global end markets, a 5% increase over last year. <h3>Air Liquide invests $100 million in US projects </h3>French industrial gas supplier Air Liquide reached a record $5.8 billion investment backlog, with the company announcing $100 million in investments in US projects, according to the company’s latest quarterly earnings results. “This is a solid, tangible indicator of future growth, which will begin to flow through as the projects under construction are going to start up,” CEO François Jackow said during the company’s Oct. 28 earnings call. Air Liquide is investing $50 million to develop hydrogen production along the US Gulf Coast by supplying hydrogen to two of the largest refiners in the US. The company is also investing over $50 million in the US semiconductor industry by building an ultra-pure gas production plant in the southeastern US on the site of the world’s largest manufacturer for advanced chip design. Air Liquide did not identify any of the companies in which it is investing. Sales for the quarter rose 2% to $7.6 billion despite the company operating in “the same turbulent environment that has defined the market since the start of the year,” Jackow said. In the Americas, gas and services sales rose 5% to $2.9 billion, driven by new production startups and strong demand. Air Liquide in the third quarter also acquired South Korean industrial gas company DIG Airgas and its backlog of nearly 20 secured projects. “This is highly strategic because it gives us a stronger foothold in the world’s fourth-largest industrial gas market, which is expected to double in the next 10 years,” Jackow said. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>. </div>

The two largest global industrial gas suppliers are leveraging investments in US projects to offset sluggish industrial activity worldwide and ongoing market uncertainties going into the last quarter of the fiscal year. In their latest earnings remarks, suppliers Linde and Air Liquide pointed to continued challenges from turbulent market conditions and currency fluctuations while looking to their project backlogs as signs of future growth. Considered companies that serve as indicators of industrial market trends, Linde and Air Liquide are key providers of breakbulk and project cargo. The companies supply shipments such as gas storage tanks and heavy equipment for large industrial projects in industries including manufacturing, chemicals and steel production. Despite an ongoing global “industrial recession,” a $10 billion project backlog is driving optimism for long-term prospects at Linde, the world’s largest industrial gas supplier, CEO Sanjiv Lamba said during the company’s third-quarter earnings call on Oct. 31. The company is also exploring US steel and metal projects and facility expansions that could create greater gas demand. “We find ourselves positioned with the right players who are contemplating that expansion,” Lamba said. Manufacturing was the company’s fastest-growing industrial market for the US-German company in the third quarter, with growth being the most pronounced in the United States. “We seem to have lapped some of the tariff concerns, and this has translated into a healthy uptick in manufacturing activity,” Lamba said. Global sales rose 3% year over year to $8.6 billion for the quarter despite “stagnant industrial activity,” Lamba said. The Americas accounted for 72% of Linde’s $10 billion project backlog, which remained flat from a year ago. Sales in the Americas grew 3% to $3.8 billion for the quarter. Lamba said Linde remains guarded about any near-term recovery from a global “industrial recession.” Industrial sectors — including manufacturing, chemicals, energy, and metals and mining — accounted for 54% of the company’s global end markets, a 5% increase over last year. Air Liquide invests $100 million in US projects French industrial gas supplier Air Liquide reached a record $5.8 billion investment backlog, with the company announcing $100 million in investments in US projects, according to the company’s latest quarterly earnings results. “This is a solid, tangible indicator of future growth, which will begin to flow through as the projects under construction are going to start up,” CEO François Jackow said during the company’s Oct. 28 earnings call. Air Liquide is investing $50 million to develop hydrogen production along the US Gulf Coast by supplying hydrogen to two of the largest refiners in the US. The company is also investing over $50 million in the US semiconductor industry by building an ultra-pure gas production plant in the southeastern US on the site of the world’s largest manufacturer for advanced chip design. Air Liquide did not identify any of the companies in which it is investing. Sales for the quarter rose 2% to $7.6 billion despite the company operating in “the same turbulent environment that has defined the market since the start of the year,” Jackow said. In the Americas, gas and services sales rose 5% to $2.9 billion, driven by new production startups and strong demand. Air Liquide in the third quarter also acquired South Korean industrial gas company DIG Airgas and its backlog of nearly 20 secured projects. “This is highly strategic because it gives us a stronger foothold in the world’s fourth-largest industrial gas market, which is expected to double in the next 10 years,” Jackow said. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Breakbulk carriers

US manufacturing projects drive momentum for global industrial gas companies

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">If the proposed Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern merger proceeds, the balance of power inside a little-known cooperative that serves as the industry’s shared equipment pool could shift dramatically.</div>

If the proposed Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern merger proceeds, the balance of power inside a little-known cooperative that serves as the industry’s shared equipment pool could shift dramatically.

<div class="phx-topic">When your railroad says “no cars available,” the problem usually isn’t a shortage. It’s a cooperative most shippers have never heard of — one that controls nearly every intermodal container, autorack and flatcar in North America. And if the proposed Union Pacific (UP)–Norfolk Southern (NS) merger proceeds, the balance of power inside that cooperative could shift dramatically. That cooperative is TTX Company. While shippers and unions debate potential service disruptions and job losses from the $85 billion merger announced in July, a more fundamental question has gone unasked: What happens when one railroad becomes the dominant voice in the industry’s shared equipment pool? <h3>The system you didn’t know existed </h3>TTX manages approximately 177,000 well cars, flats, autoracks and boxcars, representing about $17 billion in assets. It’s a neutral pool owned collectively by the Class I railroads, operating under Surface Transportation Board (STB) oversight since 1974. The concept is simple: Competing railroads share rolling stock rather than hoarding it. When a car finishes one move, it can be loaded again immediately, regardless of whose track it’s on next. This model has saved the industry billions in duplicate investment and given shippers a measure of reliability in an otherwise fragmented system. Cars flow to demand, not ownership. Repairs are standardized. Procurement is centralized. Until now, no single railroad has had enough control to tilt the playing field. <h3>Why the merger changes everything </h3>The combined Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern network would span nearly 60% of US rail route miles across 43 states, likely making them TTX’s largest shareholder by a significant margin. On paper, neutrality is guaranteed through the STB’s pooling agreement. In practice, concentration of influence can change incentives subtly, but powerfully. Who prioritizes which lanes for car replacement? Who decides where limited heavy-duty flats or autoracks are deployed first? When I was at Maersk negotiating large-scale rail contracts, we constantly ran into a black hole of visibility. Equipment was technically available, but no one could pinpoint where it was or who controlled the next move. The pooling model made coordination possible, but it also made accountability diffuse. Now imagine that opacity combined with ownership concentration. A railroad controlling the largest stake in TTX doesn’t need to explicitly starve competitors of equipment. It just needs to optimize for its own network first. Repairs get prioritized in its lanes. New equipment gets spec’d for its corridors. Allocation algorithms favor its terminals. The result isn’t dramatic — it’s death by a thousand micro-decisions that tilt velocity in one direction. <h3>What gravity looks like </h3>Every time a major shipper changes carriers, the math inside the TTX pool shifts. Steel doesn’t teleport. Cars must physically migrate through the network, a process that can take weeks. Shortages often follow commercial wins because the new carrier gains the freight before it gains the equipment. Even in a neutral pool, gravity takes time to reset. Post-merger, that shock absorption could become selective. If car allocation subtly favors the combined UP-NS lanes, competitors lose not just freight; they lose the equipment velocity needed to compete for the next contract. <h3>What the STB should do </h3>The STB received formal notice of the merger on July 30, 2025. The railroads plan to file their full application by Jan. 29, 2026, triggering a 16-month statutory review. The STB has broad authority to preserve equilibrium through independent TTX governance, fleet-allocation audits and service-performance metrics tied to pooling access. Whether those powers are used will determine if TTX remains the stabilizer it was built to be, or becomes another lever of competitive advantage hidden inside consolidation. The 1996 Union Pacific-Southern Pacific merger produced what the head of the nation’s largest rail union called a “massive meltdown.” Service disruptions lasted months. The STB should apply those lessons to equipment pooling now, before approval — not after the damage is done. <h3>What shippers should ask now </h3>Most customers never deal directly with TTX, but they feel its influence in every service metric. Don’t wait until after the merger is approved. Start asking pointed questions now: How do you measure car velocity in my lanes? Who controls the pool cars that serve my freight? What protections ensure neutrality if ownership concentration shifts? If your railroad can’t answer clearly, you’re not buying transportation, you’re buying uncertainty. <h3>The bottom line </h3>TTX doesn’t appear in marketing campaigns, but its model — shared steel, shared access — keeps the industry balanced. The merger debate has focused on jobs, rates and service promises. But the real test will be whether a system designed for competition can survive when one player holds the dominant stake. Because when the pool tips, everyone feels it. And once gravity shifts, it doesn’t shift back. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO), and Patriot Rail. He is the founder of Integrated Multimodal Solutions LLC and author of the Substack newsletter Signals &amp; Switches. Contact him at  <a href="mailto:paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io">paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io</a>. </div>

When your railroad says “no cars available,” the problem usually isn’t a shortage. It’s a cooperative most shippers have never heard of — one that controls nearly every intermodal container, autorack and flatcar in North America. And if the proposed Union Pacific (UP)–Norfolk Southern (NS) merger proceeds, the balance of power inside that cooperative could shift dramatically. That cooperative is TTX Company. While shippers and unions debate potential service disruptions and job losses from the $85 billion merger announced in July, a more fundamental question has gone unasked: What happens when one railroad becomes the dominant voice in the industry’s shared equipment pool? The system you didn’t know existed TTX manages approximately 177,000 well cars, flats, autoracks and boxcars, representing about $17 billion in assets. It’s a neutral pool owned collectively by the Class I railroads, operating under Surface Transportation Board (STB) oversight since 1974. The concept is simple: Competing railroads share rolling stock rather than hoarding it. When a car finishes one move, it can be loaded again immediately, regardless of whose track it’s on next. This model has saved the industry billions in duplicate investment and given shippers a measure of reliability in an otherwise fragmented system. Cars flow to demand, not ownership. Repairs are standardized. Procurement is centralized. Until now, no single railroad has had enough control to tilt the playing field. Why the merger changes everything The combined Union Pacific–Norfolk Southern network would span nearly 60% of US rail route miles across 43 states, likely making them TTX’s largest shareholder by a significant margin. On paper, neutrality is guaranteed through the STB’s pooling agreement. In practice, concentration of influence can change incentives subtly, but powerfully. Who prioritizes which lanes for car replacement? Who decides where limited heavy-duty flats or autoracks are deployed first? When I was at Maersk negotiating large-scale rail contracts, we constantly ran into a black hole of visibility. Equipment was technically available, but no one could pinpoint where it was or who controlled the next move. The pooling model made coordination possible, but it also made accountability diffuse. Now imagine that opacity combined with ownership concentration. A railroad controlling the largest stake in TTX doesn’t need to explicitly starve competitors of equipment. It just needs to optimize for its own network first. Repairs get prioritized in its lanes. New equipment gets spec’d for its corridors. Allocation algorithms favor its terminals. The result isn’t dramatic — it’s death by a thousand micro-decisions that tilt velocity in one direction. What gravity looks like Every time a major shipper changes carriers, the math inside the TTX pool shifts. Steel doesn’t teleport. Cars must physically migrate through the network, a process that can take weeks. Shortages often follow commercial wins because the new carrier gains the freight before it gains the equipment. Even in a neutral pool, gravity takes time to reset. Post-merger, that shock absorption could become selective. If car allocation subtly favors the combined UP-NS lanes, competitors lose not just freight; they lose the equipment velocity needed to compete for the next contract. What the STB should do The STB received formal notice of the merger on July 30, 2025. The railroads plan to file their full application by Jan. 29, 2026, triggering a 16-month statutory review. The STB has broad authority to preserve equilibrium through independent TTX governance, fleet-allocation audits and service-performance metrics tied to pooling access. Whether those powers are used will determine if TTX remains the stabilizer it was built to be, or becomes another lever of competitive advantage hidden inside consolidation. The 1996 Union Pacific-Southern Pacific merger produced what the head of the nation’s largest rail union called a “massive meltdown.” Service disruptions lasted months. The STB should apply those lessons to equipment pooling now, before approval — not after the damage is done. What shippers should ask now Most customers never deal directly with TTX, but they feel its influence in every service metric. Don’t wait until after the merger is approved. Start asking pointed questions now: How do you measure car velocity in my lanes? Who controls the pool cars that serve my freight? What protections ensure neutrality if ownership concentration shifts? If your railroad can’t answer clearly, you’re not buying transportation, you’re buying uncertainty. The bottom line TTX doesn’t appear in marketing campaigns, but its model — shared steel, shared access — keeps the industry balanced. The merger debate has focused on jobs, rates and service promises. But the real test will be whether a system designed for competition can survive when one player holds the dominant stake. Because when the pool tips, everyone feels it. And once gravity shifts, it doesn’t shift back. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO), and Patriot Rail. He is the founder of Integrated Multimodal Solutions LLC and author of the Substack newsletter Signals & Switches. Contact him at   paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io .

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

UP-NS merger could mean new dominant voice inside rail industry cooperative

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The LTL world of 2025 does not reward those who guess, but rather those who know — and knowing begins with visibility. </div>

The LTL world of 2025 does not reward those who guess, but rather those who know — and knowing begins with visibility.

<div class="phx-topic">The US less-than-truckload (LTL) sector stands at a critical crossroads. Faced with depressed demand, high operating costs, economic uncertainty and rising customer expectations, LTL carriers, brokers and shippers are under mounting pressure to do more with less. Efficiency, accuracy and transparency have never been more vital. Even as some aspects of LTL have modernized, persistent blind spots still drain time, revenue and customer satisfaction. Accessorial management and location visibility remain at the heart of operational performance and profitability in the LTL sector, and companies must solve these challenges to thrive in this freight environment. Accessorial charges are often treated as the fine print of freight, but their financial impact is anything but small. These additional fees, covering services such as liftgate usage, residential delivery, limited-access sites and inside delivery are frequently not accounted for until after a delivery is completed. At that point, shippers receive unexpected invoices, brokers scramble to reconcile charges, and carriers are left fielding disputes that strain valuable relationships and negatively impact their bottom line. Without an accurate, upfront method of identifying potential accessorials, companies lose control over cost predictability. This unpredictability does more than damage budgets. It undermines long-term rate negotiations and muddies performance metrics such as cost per shipment and gross margin. Billing disputes over accessorials can also slow down cash flow and stretch out time-to-payment cycles. As the logistics sector faces tighter margins and rising customer expectations, these seemingly minor charges can add up to major financial consequences. Location data is another underestimated factor that directly impacts LTL performance. While most transportation management systems (TMSs) offer basic shipment tracking, they often lack granular location insights. This includes data points such as whether a site is residential or commercial, whether there is dock access or a forklift onsite, or if the delivery site has limited hours or requires specialized entry. These details may seem minor, but their absence leads to service mismatches, re-delivery attempts, extended dwell times and more accessorial charges. For example, failing to flag a residential delivery that requires a liftgate can result in a surprise fee and an unhappy customer. A shipment bound for a military base or an airport without the right equipment or credentials can create costly delays and failed deliveries. Inaccurate or incomplete location information does more than increase costs — it erodes operational agility. <h3>Technology can ease challenges </h3>The good news is that technology now exists to solve these challenges at scale. New platforms that leverage AI, machine learning and geospatial data are transforming how logistics professionals manage LTL freight. These tools can identify potential accessorial charges before the freight is tendered, analyze delivery site characteristics in real time and deliver a unified accessorial view across all stakeholders. By automating accessorial identification during order entry and integrating precise location attributes such as limited access, loading dock availability, forklifts on site or gated entry, these platforms allow teams to move from reactive firefighting to proactive planning. With real-time alerts and API integrations that connect directly into a TMS, shippers, brokers and carriers can operate from a shared source of accessorial truth. The impact of smarter accessorial identification and location visibility delivers measurable results. Companies that have adopted these advanced solutions have reported a 75% reduction in unexpected accessorial fees, leading to cleaner invoices and faster dispute resolution. Customers have also seen improved on-time in-full (OTIF) performance, driving higher customer satisfaction and stronger service-level agreement (SLA) compliance. This shift is particularly timely in 2025, as the LTL industry grapples with economic volatility, rising operating costs and major classification changes. Freight volumes are inconsistent, carriers are prioritizing profitability over market share, and the new National Motor Freight Traffic Association density-based classification system is forcing shippers to re-evaluate how they package and price freight. In this environment, hidden costs such as accessorials and inefficiencies tied to poor location visibility can erode already thin margins. With shifting demand, cost inflation and operational headwinds, the ability to forecast costs, identify risks and plan accordingly has become a key competitive advantage. In the past, accessorial management and granular location visibility may have been viewed as optional enhancements. Today, they are essential for any company that relies on LTL shipping as a core part of its logistics strategy. When customer expectations are rising and disruptions are the new norm, having visibility into every shipment detail and every delivery site is table stakes. The LTL world of 2025 does not reward those who guess. It rewards those who know, and knowing begins with visibility. North Winship is president of Shiplify. Contact him at <a href="mailto:northw@shiplify.com">northw@shiplify.com</a>. Bart De Muynck is a strategic advisor for Drewry. Contact him at <a href="mailto:bart@bartdemuynck.com">bart@bartdemuynck.com</a>. </div>

The US less-than-truckload (LTL) sector stands at a critical crossroads. Faced with depressed demand, high operating costs, economic uncertainty and rising customer expectations, LTL carriers, brokers and shippers are under mounting pressure to do more with less. Efficiency, accuracy and transparency have never been more vital. Even as some aspects of LTL have modernized, persistent blind spots still drain time, revenue and customer satisfaction. Accessorial management and location visibility remain at the heart of operational performance and profitability in the LTL sector, and companies must solve these challenges to thrive in this freight environment. Accessorial charges are often treated as the fine print of freight, but their financial impact is anything but small. These additional fees, covering services such as liftgate usage, residential delivery, limited-access sites and inside delivery are frequently not accounted for until after a delivery is completed. At that point, shippers receive unexpected invoices, brokers scramble to reconcile charges, and carriers are left fielding disputes that strain valuable relationships and negatively impact their bottom line. Without an accurate, upfront method of identifying potential accessorials, companies lose control over cost predictability. This unpredictability does more than damage budgets. It undermines long-term rate negotiations and muddies performance metrics such as cost per shipment and gross margin. Billing disputes over accessorials can also slow down cash flow and stretch out time-to-payment cycles. As the logistics sector faces tighter margins and rising customer expectations, these seemingly minor charges can add up to major financial consequences. Location data is another underestimated factor that directly impacts LTL performance. While most transportation management systems (TMSs) offer basic shipment tracking, they often lack granular location insights. This includes data points such as whether a site is residential or commercial, whether there is dock access or a forklift onsite, or if the delivery site has limited hours or requires specialized entry. These details may seem minor, but their absence leads to service mismatches, re-delivery attempts, extended dwell times and more accessorial charges. For example, failing to flag a residential delivery that requires a liftgate can result in a surprise fee and an unhappy customer. A shipment bound for a military base or an airport without the right equipment or credentials can create costly delays and failed deliveries. Inaccurate or incomplete location information does more than increase costs — it erodes operational agility. Technology can ease challenges The good news is that technology now exists to solve these challenges at scale. New platforms that leverage AI, machine learning and geospatial data are transforming how logistics professionals manage LTL freight. These tools can identify potential accessorial charges before the freight is tendered, analyze delivery site characteristics in real time and deliver a unified accessorial view across all stakeholders. By automating accessorial identification during order entry and integrating precise location attributes such as limited access, loading dock availability, forklifts on site or gated entry, these platforms allow teams to move from reactive firefighting to proactive planning. With real-time alerts and API integrations that connect directly into a TMS, shippers, brokers and carriers can operate from a shared source of accessorial truth. The impact of smarter accessorial identification and location visibility delivers measurable results. Companies that have adopted these advanced solutions have reported a 75% reduction in unexpected accessorial fees, leading to cleaner invoices and faster dispute resolution. Customers have also seen improved on-time in-full (OTIF) performance, driving higher customer satisfaction and stronger service-level agreement (SLA) compliance. This shift is particularly timely in 2025, as the LTL industry grapples with economic volatility, rising operating costs and major classification changes. Freight volumes are inconsistent, carriers are prioritizing profitability over market share, and the new National Motor Freight Traffic Association density-based classification system is forcing shippers to re-evaluate how they package and price freight. In this environment, hidden costs such as accessorials and inefficiencies tied to poor location visibility can erode already thin margins. With shifting demand, cost inflation and operational headwinds, the ability to forecast costs, identify risks and plan accordingly has become a key competitive advantage. In the past, accessorial management and granular location visibility may have been viewed as optional enhancements. Today, they are essential for any company that relies on LTL shipping as a core part of its logistics strategy. When customer expectations are rising and disruptions are the new norm, having visibility into every shipment detail and every delivery site is table stakes. The LTL world of 2025 does not reward those who guess. It rewards those who know, and knowing begins with visibility. North Winship is president of Shiplify. Contact him at northw@shiplify.com . Bart De Muynck is a strategic advisor for Drewry. Contact him at bart@bartdemuynck.com .

Visibility transforming accessorial and location insights in LTL shipping

Notes: Index base = 100; the higher the value, the greater intermodal savings compared with truckload

Spot ISI

Contract ISI

The Journal of Commerce Intermodal Savings Indices (ISIs) measure the average differential between rates for US domestic intermodal rail and truckload service — both spot and contract — across 120 lanes by sending estimates to third-party logistics providers (3PLs) and shippers to review. The estimates include margins and fuel but exclude accessorial charges such as detention, demurrage (storage fees), excessive per diem, lumper fees and other fees. ISI data partners include DAT Freight & Analytics, the International Association of North America (IANA), InTek Freight and Logistics, Loadsmart, and Sunset Transport.

US Spot and Contract Intermodal Savings Indices (JOC)

JOC Intermodal Savings Index Rolling 3-Month Average Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">An $800 general rate increase implemented over the weekend for West Coast business was already starting to deteriorate by Tuesday after some early — and fleeting — staying power generated by the US-China trade deal.</div>

An $800 general rate increase implemented over the weekend for West Coast business was already starting to deteriorate by Tuesday after some early — and fleeting — staying power generated by the US-China trade deal.

<div class="phx-topic">A general rate increase (GRI) of approximately $800 per FEU implemented by ocean carriers this weekend on the Asia to US West Coast trade is already beginning to erode amid a fundamental lack of demand, forwarders and carriers say. “The load factor to the West Coast is really not that strong,” Chris Sur, executive director for global sales at logistics provider Glovis America, told the Journal of Commerce. The GRI, enacted on Saturday, showed some initial staying power, coming just days after the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-china-suspend-reciprocal-port-fees-as-part-of-wider-trade-deal-6105849">US and China reached a broad trade deal</a> that partially rolled back some tariffs and set a one-year pause on reciprocal port fees. A carrier executive said that in the immediate aftermath of the agreement, some retailers wanted to begin pulling fresh cargo into the US quickly because of uncertainty over how long the truce would last. That strategy lent support to rates on the West Coast trade, and the new GRI. “There was a bit of pent-up demand, and the West Coast is the fastest route,” the carrier executive said. The GRI pushed the West Coast spot rate up to about $2,750 to $2,850 per FEU; the rate one week earlier was about $2,040 per FEU, according to Platts, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. But the bullishness was short-lived, with sources saying the market had already begun to give up the GRI gains by Tuesday. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="e8c13a3e-9f5a-412f-8741-adbf5e1a7779"></dynamic-object></div>The rate moves for Asia to East Coast business were even more dramatic. Trans-Pacific carriers over the weekend attempted to impose a $1,000 per FEU GRI on shipments from Asia to the East Coast, but that GRI “completely collapsed,” a forwarder said. By Monday, the East Coast spot rate had dropped to about $2,750 to $2,850 per FEU — about the same level as the West Coast rate, a mark of parity that is highly unusual. “I never remember that happening before,” the forwarder said. <h3>Holiday merchandise has already arrived </h3>Sur said the reality in the eastbound trans-Pacific is that retailers have already imported their holiday season merchandise for the Black Friday sales that begin on the day after Thanksgiving in the US. The remaining two months of the year will be a weak period for imports, as they usually are, he said. Meanwhile, bookings for shipments from China into the US fell about 16% in October compared with September, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun &amp; Bradstreet. Still, bookings for Chinese cargo during the second half of October rebounded somewhat, increasing by more than 15% compared with the first half of the month. The structural weakness in overall demand in the eastbound trans-Pacific will likely continue through the end of the year, but that does not preclude carriers from attempting to implement further GRIs, Sur said. “If carriers have the resolve to do it, they’ll do it,” he said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

A general rate increase (GRI) of approximately $800 per FEU implemented by ocean carriers this weekend on the Asia to US West Coast trade is already beginning to erode amid a fundamental lack of demand, forwarders and carriers say. “The load factor to the West Coast is really not that strong,” Chris Sur, executive director for global sales at logistics provider Glovis America, told the Journal of Commerce. The GRI, enacted on Saturday, showed some initial staying power, coming just days after the US and China reached a broad trade deal that partially rolled back some tariffs and set a one-year pause on reciprocal port fees. A carrier executive said that in the immediate aftermath of the agreement, some retailers wanted to begin pulling fresh cargo into the US quickly because of uncertainty over how long the truce would last. That strategy lent support to rates on the West Coast trade, and the new GRI. “There was a bit of pent-up demand, and the West Coast is the fastest route,” the carrier executive said. The GRI pushed the West Coast spot rate up to about $2,750 to $2,850 per FEU; the rate one week earlier was about $2,040 per FEU, according to Platts, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. But the bullishness was short-lived, with sources saying the market had already begun to give up the GRI gains by Tuesday. The rate moves for Asia to East Coast business were even more dramatic. Trans-Pacific carriers over the weekend attempted to impose a $1,000 per FEU GRI on shipments from Asia to the East Coast, but that GRI “completely collapsed,” a forwarder said. By Monday, the East Coast spot rate had dropped to about $2,750 to $2,850 per FEU — about the same level as the West Coast rate, a mark of parity that is highly unusual. “I never remember that happening before,” the forwarder said. Holiday merchandise has already arrived Sur said the reality in the eastbound trans-Pacific is that retailers have already imported their holiday season merchandise for the Black Friday sales that begin on the day after Thanksgiving in the US. The remaining two months of the year will be a weak period for imports, as they usually are, he said. Meanwhile, bookings for shipments from China into the US fell about 16% in October compared with September, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun & Bradstreet. Still, bookings for Chinese cargo during the second half of October rebounded somewhat, increasing by more than 15% compared with the first half of the month. The structural weakness in overall demand in the eastbound trans-Pacific will likely continue through the end of the year, but that does not preclude carriers from attempting to implement further GRIs, Sur said. “If carriers have the resolve to do it, they’ll do it,” he said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .

Soft demand in eastbound trans-Pacific overwhelms carriers’ GRI attempt

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">While intermodal savings remain above 20%, according to the latest Intermodal Savings Index, there is not enough pressure yet in the trucking market to drive up rates across the US on intermodal rail.</div>

While intermodal savings remain above 20%, according to the latest Intermodal Savings Index, there is not enough pressure yet in the trucking market to drive up rates across the US on intermodal rail.

<div class="phx-topic">US shippers saved an average of 21% on spot market freight and nearly 25% on contract loads in the third quarter by using domestic intermodal instead of long-haul trucking as truckload spot rates began to recover, according to the latest Journal of Commerce <a href="https://www.joc.com/resources/special-reports/intermodal-savings-index">Intermodal Savings Index</a> (ISI). Intermodal contract rates were flat in the third quarter compared with a year ago — up 0.4% excluding fuel, but down 0.2% including fuel. Momentum picked up in September, however, as spot truckload rates on indexed lanes rose 2% year over year; preliminary data for October shows spot truckload rates continued to rise. Truckload spot rates tend to be a leading indicator, which results in truckload contract rates rising, with intermodal rates eventually following as capacity tightens. North American railroads hauled 2.22 million domestic containers in the third quarter, up 2.5% compared with a year ago, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA). The results were better than the Journal of Commerce forecast of a 1% decline for the third quarter, due to an unusually strong September. IANA reported domestic container volume grew 5.8% year over year in September. “[It was] a delayed West Coast peak season from what we originally anticipated,” Phil Yeager, CEO of intermodal service provider Hub Group, said on an Oct. 30 earnings call. “We did not see that inventory materially impact domestic shipping until following the Labor Day holiday. Strong West Coast shipping demand in September continued through October, and customers are indicating that will be maintained into November.” The Spot ISI averaged 121.1 in the third quarter, up from 120.0 a year earlier. The Contract ISI slipped to 124.5 from 126 a year earlier. Index values above 100 indicate intermodal is the more cost-effective mode; the higher the index number, the greater the savings. A spot ISI of 121.1 translates to a 21.1% savings on intermodal versus truckload, and a contract ISI of 124.5 implies a 24.5% savings. All calculations assume local drayage at origin and destination, so shippers with distribution centers more than 30 minutes from the terminal will save less than the index values. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ec19c445-5809-4a2a-9f63-2d09d02aca85"></dynamic-object></div>In terms of raw dollars, intermodal shippers saved an average of $563 per container on the spot market in the third quarter and $734 per container on the contract market. In the third quarter of 2024, the average spot intermodal load saved $633 per container, with the contract load saving $704 per container. Spot intermodal rates rose 3 cents between July and September to $1.56 per mile, while spot truckload rates rose 6 cents to $1.95 during the same period, according to the ISI. Contract truckload rates fell 2 cents to $1.94 per mile in the third quarter, while contract intermodal rates rose 1 cent to $1.50 per mile, primarily due to peak season surcharges. <h3>Watching 2026 </h3>It’s unclear whether the momentum in the late third quarter will translate into rate increases in truckload or intermodal next year. A prolonged West Coast peak season in 2024 yielded only minimal rate increases in contracts negotiated earlier this year on lanes exiting Southern California, while annual pricing on other lanes was flat or down. J.B. Hunt Transport Services and Hub Group were reserved in their outlook for 2026 intermodal bids. “What is washed in the results is there is some good pricing movement in the head-hauls. There is some negative pricing in backhauls,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on an Oct. 15 earnings call. “And when you combine them, it looks relatively muted in terms of price per load.” Field also described transcontinental volume on head-haul lanes out of Southern California as “disappointing” in the third quarter. Yeager was also non-committal about how Hub Group will approach bid season. “[We are] executing with the mindset that we aren’t going to get cyclical help [from the economy],” he said on the earnings call. “We want to see that capacity tighten. We certainly want to get our foundational network established at the front end of bid season ... we do see great opportunities in the head-haul right now.” <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/volume-not-pricing-driving-us-intermodal-results-in-q3-6099159">Intermodal executives</a> at the Journal of Commerce Inland Distribution Conference Sept. 29-Oct. 1 predicted that contract rates will rise on outbound lanes in California in early 2026 but remain flat or down elsewhere. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. The data behind the Contract ISI and Spot ISI is available to Journal of Commerce subscribers with a Gold-tier subscription. </div>

US shippers saved an average of 21% on spot market freight and nearly 25% on contract loads in the third quarter by using domestic intermodal instead of long-haul trucking as truckload spot rates began to recover, according to the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Savings Index (ISI). Intermodal contract rates were flat in the third quarter compared with a year ago — up 0.4% excluding fuel, but down 0.2% including fuel. Momentum picked up in September, however, as spot truckload rates on indexed lanes rose 2% year over year; preliminary data for October shows spot truckload rates continued to rise. Truckload spot rates tend to be a leading indicator, which results in truckload contract rates rising, with intermodal rates eventually following as capacity tightens. North American railroads hauled 2.22 million domestic containers in the third quarter, up 2.5% compared with a year ago, according to the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA). The results were better than the Journal of Commerce forecast of a 1% decline for the third quarter, due to an unusually strong September. IANA reported domestic container volume grew 5.8% year over year in September. “[It was] a delayed West Coast peak season from what we originally anticipated,” Phil Yeager, CEO of intermodal service provider Hub Group, said on an Oct. 30 earnings call. “We did not see that inventory materially impact domestic shipping until following the Labor Day holiday. Strong West Coast shipping demand in September continued through October, and customers are indicating that will be maintained into November.” The Spot ISI averaged 121.1 in the third quarter, up from 120.0 a year earlier. The Contract ISI slipped to 124.5 from 126 a year earlier. Index values above 100 indicate intermodal is the more cost-effective mode; the higher the index number, the greater the savings. A spot ISI of 121.1 translates to a 21.1% savings on intermodal versus truckload, and a contract ISI of 124.5 implies a 24.5% savings. All calculations assume local drayage at origin and destination, so shippers with distribution centers more than 30 minutes from the terminal will save less than the index values. In terms of raw dollars, intermodal shippers saved an average of $563 per container on the spot market in the third quarter and $734 per container on the contract market. In the third quarter of 2024, the average spot intermodal load saved $633 per container, with the contract load saving $704 per container. Spot intermodal rates rose 3 cents between July and September to $1.56 per mile, while spot truckload rates rose 6 cents to $1.95 during the same period, according to the ISI. Contract truckload rates fell 2 cents to $1.94 per mile in the third quarter, while contract intermodal rates rose 1 cent to $1.50 per mile, primarily due to peak season surcharges. Watching 2026 It’s unclear whether the momentum in the late third quarter will translate into rate increases in truckload or intermodal next year. A prolonged West Coast peak season in 2024 yielded only minimal rate increases in contracts negotiated earlier this year on lanes exiting Southern California, while annual pricing on other lanes was flat or down. J.B. Hunt Transport Services and Hub Group were reserved in their outlook for 2026 intermodal bids. “What is washed in the results is there is some good pricing movement in the head-hauls. There is some negative pricing in backhauls,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on an Oct. 15 earnings call. “And when you combine them, it looks relatively muted in terms of price per load.” Field also described transcontinental volume on head-haul lanes out of Southern California as “disappointing” in the third quarter. Yeager was also non-committal about how Hub Group will approach bid season. “[We are] executing with the mindset that we aren’t going to get cyclical help [from the economy],” he said on the earnings call. “We want to see that capacity tighten. We certainly want to get our foundational network established at the front end of bid season ... we do see great opportunities in the head-haul right now.” Intermodal executives at the Journal of Commerce Inland Distribution Conference Sept. 29-Oct. 1 predicted that contract rates will rise on outbound lanes in California in early 2026 but remain flat or down elsewhere. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com . The data behind the Contract ISI and Spot ISI is available to Journal of Commerce subscribers with a Gold-tier subscription.

Rail News

Intermodal savings rose in Q3, but might not yield high rates in ‘26

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Beijing is expected to soon announce the start date of its own 12-month pause on reciprocal port fees on US ships, a deal that was agreed to last week as part of a broad trade framework hammered out by the two superpowers.</div>

Beijing is expected to soon announce the start date of its own 12-month pause on reciprocal port fees on US ships, a deal that was agreed to last week as part of a broad trade framework hammered out by the two superpowers.

<div class="phx-topic">The year-long pause on US port fees for Chinese-operated or -built ships, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-china-suspend-reciprocal-port-fees-as-part-of-wider-trade-deal-6105849">agreed to last week between US and Chinese officials</a>, will start on Nov. 10, the White House announced Saturday. The move will pave the way for China to lift its retaliatory port fees on US-owned and -controlled vessels, although there was no immediate response from Beijing whether its suspension of port charges will occur on the same day as the US action. But one Hong Kong-based analyst expected China to end its charges on Nov. 10 or shortly after, repeating what happened when China followed the US in imposing reciprocal port call charges on Oct. 14. During the 12-month pause in port fees, “the US will negotiate with China” over Beijing’s alleged dominance in the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors, the White House statement said, without giving further details. Those talks would take place while the US continued “its historic cooperation with the Republic of Korea and Japan on revitalizing American shipbuilding,” the statement added. The Nov. 10 date was announced in a statement that also gave further details of the trade concessions agreed to by both sides during talks in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on Oct. 26 and confirmed by presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping at their meeting in South Korea last Thursday. The broad agreement will see China purchase at least 12 million metric tons of US soybeans during the last two months of this year and buy at least 25 million metric tons a year in 2026, 2027 and 2028. Additionally, China will resume purchases of US sorghum and hardwood logs. China will also suspend all the retaliatory tariffs announced since March 4, including levies “on a vast swath of US agricultural products including chicken, wheat, corn, cotton, sorghum, soybeans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy products,” the White House statement said. China will suspend or remove all retaliatory non-tariff countermeasures taken against the US since March, the statement added. “China will further extend the expiration of its market-based tariff exclusion process for imports from the United States and exclusions will remain valid until Dec. 31, 2026,” the White House said. “China will terminate its various investigations targeting US companies in the semiconductor supply chain, including its antitrust, anti-monopoly, and anti-dumping investigations." The White House did not give any timeframe for China’s implementation of the trade concessions. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="a08410a8-0b00-4c48-9ef6-78b6354f0678"></dynamic-object></div>For its part, the US will end the 10% so-called “fentanyl tariffs” on Nov. 10 and maintain its suspension of heightened reciprocal tariffs on Chinese imports until Nov. 10, 2026. The current 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect during the suspension period, the statement said. US imports from China have fallen sharply since mid-year amid the trade dispute. Imports hit 984,280 TEUs in July, the second-highest mark in 2025, then fell in August and September, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. <h3>Questions remain </h3>Despite the US-China deal on port fees, Brian Maloney, a partner at New York-based law firm Seward &amp; Kissel’s maritime and transportation group, said there are still many questions to be answered. “Will this apply to foreign-built vehicle carriers and ro/ro vessels or will the pause apply only to the fees for Chinese-owned, -operated or -built vessels?,” Maloney said. “When will the Chinese response pause kick in, which could matter for vessels actively trading? And will either country extend retroactive relief to Oct. 14?” Lars Jensen, CEO of consultant Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce contributor, said the lower tariffs open a window of opportunity for US shippers. “The question is whether it will prompt a boost in shipments — effectively pulling the seasonal boost from Chinese New Year forward by more than a month,” Jensen said <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7391046713332875264/">in a LinkedIn post Monday</a>. “The coming weeks will show whether this is going to happen, or whether US importers see the upside of lower tariffs more than counteracted by a risk of consumer spending slowdown in the US.” Jensen pointed out that shippers will have to go through the details of how the deal impacts them specifically. “But it is important to note here that almost all US actions are temporary in the sense that actions are merely paused until Nov. 10, 2026,” he wrote. “This means that more trade talks will have to happen prior to that date, and with this comes the risk of more changes [positive or negative]." Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

The year-long pause on US port fees for Chinese-operated or -built ships, agreed to last week between US and Chinese officials , will start on Nov. 10, the White House announced Saturday. The move will pave the way for China to lift its retaliatory port fees on US-owned and -controlled vessels, although there was no immediate response from Beijing whether its suspension of port charges will occur on the same day as the US action. But one Hong Kong-based analyst expected China to end its charges on Nov. 10 or shortly after, repeating what happened when China followed the US in imposing reciprocal port call charges on Oct. 14. During the 12-month pause in port fees, “the US will negotiate with China” over Beijing’s alleged dominance in the maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors, the White House statement said, without giving further details. Those talks would take place while the US continued “its historic cooperation with the Republic of Korea and Japan on revitalizing American shipbuilding,” the statement added. The Nov. 10 date was announced in a statement that also gave further details of the trade concessions agreed to by both sides during talks in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on Oct. 26 and confirmed by presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping at their meeting in South Korea last Thursday. The broad agreement will see China purchase at least 12 million metric tons of US soybeans during the last two months of this year and buy at least 25 million metric tons a year in 2026, 2027 and 2028. Additionally, China will resume purchases of US sorghum and hardwood logs. China will also suspend all the retaliatory tariffs announced since March 4, including levies “on a vast swath of US agricultural products including chicken, wheat, corn, cotton, sorghum, soybeans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy products,” the White House statement said. China will suspend or remove all retaliatory non-tariff countermeasures taken against the US since March, the statement added. “China will further extend the expiration of its market-based tariff exclusion process for imports from the United States and exclusions will remain valid until Dec. 31, 2026,” the White House said. “China will terminate its various investigations targeting US companies in the semiconductor supply chain, including its antitrust, anti-monopoly, and anti-dumping investigations." The White House did not give any timeframe for China’s implementation of the trade concessions. For its part, the US will end the 10% so-called “fentanyl tariffs” on Nov. 10 and maintain its suspension of heightened reciprocal tariffs on Chinese imports until Nov. 10, 2026. The current 10% reciprocal tariff will remain in effect during the suspension period, the statement said. US imports from China have fallen sharply since mid-year amid the trade dispute. Imports hit 984,280 TEUs in July, the second-highest mark in 2025, then fell in August and September, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Questions remain Despite the US-China deal on port fees, Brian Maloney, a partner at New York-based law firm Seward & Kissel’s maritime and transportation group, said there are still many questions to be answered. “Will this apply to foreign-built vehicle carriers and ro/ro vessels or will the pause apply only to the fees for Chinese-owned, -operated or -built vessels?,” Maloney said. “When will the Chinese response pause kick in, which could matter for vessels actively trading? And will either country extend retroactive relief to Oct. 14?” Lars Jensen, CEO of consultant Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce contributor, said the lower tariffs open a window of opportunity for US shippers. “The question is whether it will prompt a boost in shipments — effectively pulling the seasonal boost from Chinese New Year forward by more than a month,” Jensen said in a LinkedIn post Monday . “The coming weeks will show whether this is going to happen, or whether US importers see the upside of lower tariffs more than counteracted by a risk of consumer spending slowdown in the US.” Jensen pointed out that shippers will have to go through the details of how the deal impacts them specifically. “But it is important to note here that almost all US actions are temporary in the sense that actions are merely paused until Nov. 10, 2026,” he wrote. “This means that more trade talks will have to happen prior to that date, and with this comes the risk of more changes [positive or negative]." Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Year-long pause on US port fees targeting China vessels to start Nov. 10

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 FSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

FALL SALE EXTENDED

Use code FSW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code FSW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

In 1995, we began operations with a clear vision: to grow alongside Mexico and connect the world through our terminals. Our priority has always been to deliver excellence in service, foster economic development, and strengthen our communities. We firmly believe that progress is not only measured in tons of cargo moved, but in the opportunities we create. _______________________________________________________________ This year marks a significant milestone: SSA Marine Mexico celebrates 30 years of presence in the country, having established itself from day one as the leading port operator nationwide. Over the past three decades, we have built a legacy of reliability, innovation, and commitment to Mexico’s growth. Our journey has been defined by continuous evolution and a steadfast dedication to our mission. SSA Marine México currently operates in six of the country’s most important ports: Cozumel, Lazaro Cardenas, Manzanillo, Progreso, Tuxpan, and Veracruz. Additionally, we have signed a concession to operate a new multipurpose terminal in Guaymas, Sonora, expanding our footprint to the north of the country. We serve a wide range of segments including containers, general cargo, automobiles, cruise ships, hydrocarbons, and asphalt. As part of this ongoing commitment, SSA Marine Mexico continues to strengthen its infrastructure and capabilities. International trade remains a key driver of global economic growth, and we are proud to support this momentum. Through our continuous improvement strategy, we invest in cutting-edge technology and equipment to deliver more efficient and competitive services, contributing to the success of Mexican businesses. •	Manzanillo, Colima- Specialized Container Terminal I: On October 13, we celebrated the arrival of two new STS (Ship To Shore) Super Post Panamax dockside cranes. This $21.2 million USD investment significantly boosts our operational capacity, streamlining cargo reception and delivery processes. In line with our modernization efforts, we will also retire four of our oldest cranes, paving the way for a more sustainable and technologically advanced fleet that meets the evolving demands of international trade. With these upgrades, SSA Marine México now operates a total of 16 cranes along our 1,350-meter dock, reaffirming our position as a national benchmark in port <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-4_3 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-large" data-figure-size="large" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="4:3"><img src="/content-assets/1760982635607_Manzanillo.jpg" alt="Image provided by SSA Marine" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> •	As for the Multipurpose Terminal and Specialized Facility, also in Manzanillo, Colima, improvement and conditioning works are planned, along with the acquisition of four E-RTG (Electric Rubber-Tyred Gantry) cranes to enhance operational efficiency and sustainability. •	At our Automobile and General Cargo Terminal in the port of Veracruz, we continue to lead with specialized value-added services that support our clients’ growth. Recent investments include a new washing cabin and a general cargo warehouse, increasing indoor storage capacity by 67%. •	Lazaro Cardenas, Michoacan – Specialized Automobile Terminal: we are working on the development of an additional 4-hectare storage space within our bonded area and a 10-hectare Vehicle Distribution Center (VDC). These enhancements, along with ongoing personnel and system improvements, will reinforce our leadership in automotive handling across the Mexican Pacific coast.<span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-4_3 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-large" data-figure-size="large" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="4:3"><img src="/content-assets/1760982742240_Lazaro.jpg" alt="Image provided by SSA Marine" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> Through these strategic investments, SSA Marine Mexico reaffirms its commitment to the sustained growth of Mexico’s foreign trade. By expanding capacity, modernizing infrastructure, and diversifying services, we continue to strengthen the country’s competitiveness in global logistics. Today, we celebrate three decades of dedication, innovation, and leadership, with deep gratitude to our employees, clients, and partners for being part of this incredible journey. LINK: https://www.ssamarine.mx/<span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-16_9 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-small" data-figure-size="small" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="16:9"><img src="/content-assets/1760982787360_SSA%20Marine%20Mexico%20logo%20150pxW.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">

Manzanillo.jpg

SSA Marine Mexico: 30 years growing together.

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

FALL SALE EXTENDED: Use code FSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SUBSCRIBE TODAY: Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

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

Upgrade Subscription

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

FALL SALE EXTENDED: Use code FSW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

FALL SALE EXTENDED: Use codeFSW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

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">ODFL, XPO and Saia reported annualized declines in third-quarter shipments but are positioning themselves for a stronger freight market in 2026. </div>

ODFL, XPO and Saia reported annualized declines in third-quarter shipments but are positioning themselves for a stronger freight market in 2026.

<div class="phx-topic">US less-than-truckload (LTL) providers are pursuing highly individualized paths in an anemic freight market, with shipment volumes rising but still lower than a year ago. Three of the largest LTL carriers this week reported gains in average revenue per hundredweight for the third quarter, a sign that their pricing is not falling despite a weak market. LTL revenue per hundredweight, with or without fuel surcharges, was up 4.7% year over year at Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL) in the third quarter. At XPO, it rose 5.8% with surcharges and 5.9% without them. Saia reported a 0.5% increase in LTL revenue per hundredweight including surcharges and a 0.1% drop without them. Even with a flatter yield, Saia reported an average contract pricing renewal rate of 5.1% for the quarter. The company recently announced a 5.9% general rate increase (GRI) for non-contract tariff rates, which was effective Oct. 1. ODFL is pursuing a 4.9% non-contract GRI, effective Nov. 3, while LTL sector leader FedEx Freight will seek a 5.9% GRI on Jan. 5. The motor carriers reject claims that LTL carrier pricing discipline is weakening under the pressure of low freight demand. The US long-distance LTL producer price index, a measure of total LTL costs paid by shippers, was up 10.5% year over year in August, the last month for which data is available thanks to the US government shutdown. In discussions with shippers, “the tone is starting to shift,” Mario Harik, CEO of XPO, the fourth-largest US LTL provider, said in an interview. “A lot of customers are concerned about capacity. They can go to a discount carrier, but when the market starts to turn, will they have capacity? More and more customers expect a recovery in 2026.” <h3>Limited expectations </h3>Harik spoke with the Journal of Commerce before XPO’s earnings call with Wall Street analysts Thursday. ODFL, the second-largest US LTL carrier, released earnings Wednesday, and Saia, ranked sixth among LTL carriers by revenue, announced results Thursday. Their results differed, but their expectations were similar. “Demand feels consistent to me, but obviously we haven’t seen the inflection that we’ve all been waiting for,” ODFL CEO Adam Satterfield said Wednesday. “When will the market change? I mean, that’s obviously the big question. I’ve asked ChatGPT that, and it suggests next year. So who knows? We’ll see if AI is right or another economic forecast [is].” Saia’s shipper customers are “incrementally more positive” about prospects for 2026, CEO Frederick Holzgrefe told analysts Thursday. “We’ve got a view of the tariff landscape,” he said. “We’ve got a view of tax policy. We’ve got a view around interest rates. All that is incrementally positive, right? I’m waiting to see it in the numbers.” So far, the numbers are mostly negative in terms of volume. ODFL’s average daily shipment (ADS) count dropped 7.9% year over year in the third quarter. At XPO, the ADS fell 3.5%, while Saia’s shipments dropped 1.9% from a year ago. “We are not yet seeing a demand recovery,” XPO’s Harik said, and he doesn’t expect one in the fourth quarter. “Customers expect the market to be steady” through the end of 2025, he said. “Things aren’t getting better, but they’re not getting worse.” Customers do expect improvement in 2026, Harik said. For one, a drop in the federal funds rate could stimulate industrial demand and more corporate investment. “We have all these tailwinds,” he said. <h3>Established strategies </h3>ODFL, XPO and Saia are taking long-established approaches to the market as they wait for those tailwinds to blow. ODFL’s third-quarter decline in daily shipments was accompanied by a 4.3% annualized drop in revenue to $1.4 billion. The company remains highly profitable despite a 12.2% drop in net profit to $271 million, with a 74.3% operating ratio. ODFL has consistently been willing to protect its bottom line at the expense of top-line revenue, maintaining a premium price to protect profit margin rather than trying to use price to gain market share — a model many LTL carriers are trying to emulate. “We want to win market share; we don’t want to go out and try to take it,” said Satterfield. Saia’s revenue fell 0.3% year over year in the quarter to $839.6 million, while its net profit dropped 6.9% to $86.3 million. Its operating ratio rose slightly to 85.9%. Saia hopes to grow “share of wallet” by gaining new business from existing customers as it realigns its network, which has expanded nationwide with 39 new terminals since 2022, many of them purchased from Yellow. “It’s really not about how quickly we can grow shipment count for the sake of shipment count,” CFO Matthew Batteh said. XPO is adding new customers, onboarding 2,500 small business shippers in the third quarter and 7,500 year to date, Harik said. Those “local” customers now account for 25% of XPO’s LTL revenue, he said. The carrier is also gaining revenue from new premium services launched over the past year that carry a higher price, generating more revenue. XPO’s North American LTL revenue rose 0.3% to $1.3 billion. Operating income for the North American LTL business rose 9.6% to $217 million, although overall net income dropped 13.7% to $82 million. “We’re still in the early innings” of a freight recovery, Harik told analysts. “When the cycle starts turning, we’ll improve even more.” Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US less-than-truckload (LTL) providers are pursuing highly individualized paths in an anemic freight market, with shipment volumes rising but still lower than a year ago. Three of the largest LTL carriers this week reported gains in average revenue per hundredweight for the third quarter, a sign that their pricing is not falling despite a weak market. LTL revenue per hundredweight, with or without fuel surcharges, was up 4.7% year over year at Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL) in the third quarter. At XPO, it rose 5.8% with surcharges and 5.9% without them. Saia reported a 0.5% increase in LTL revenue per hundredweight including surcharges and a 0.1% drop without them. Even with a flatter yield, Saia reported an average contract pricing renewal rate of 5.1% for the quarter. The company recently announced a 5.9% general rate increase (GRI) for non-contract tariff rates, which was effective Oct. 1. ODFL is pursuing a 4.9% non-contract GRI, effective Nov. 3, while LTL sector leader FedEx Freight will seek a 5.9% GRI on Jan. 5. The motor carriers reject claims that LTL carrier pricing discipline is weakening under the pressure of low freight demand. The US long-distance LTL producer price index, a measure of total LTL costs paid by shippers, was up 10.5% year over year in August, the last month for which data is available thanks to the US government shutdown. In discussions with shippers, “the tone is starting to shift,” Mario Harik, CEO of XPO, the fourth-largest US LTL provider, said in an interview. “A lot of customers are concerned about capacity. They can go to a discount carrier, but when the market starts to turn, will they have capacity? More and more customers expect a recovery in 2026.” Limited expectations Harik spoke with the Journal of Commerce before XPO’s earnings call with Wall Street analysts Thursday. ODFL, the second-largest US LTL carrier, released earnings Wednesday, and Saia, ranked sixth among LTL carriers by revenue, announced results Thursday. Their results differed, but their expectations were similar. “Demand feels consistent to me, but obviously we haven’t seen the inflection that we’ve all been waiting for,” ODFL CEO Adam Satterfield said Wednesday. “When will the market change? I mean, that’s obviously the big question. I’ve asked ChatGPT that, and it suggests next year. So who knows? We’ll see if AI is right or another economic forecast [is].” Saia’s shipper customers are “incrementally more positive” about prospects for 2026, CEO Frederick Holzgrefe told analysts Thursday. “We’ve got a view of the tariff landscape,” he said. “We’ve got a view of tax policy. We’ve got a view around interest rates. All that is incrementally positive, right? I’m waiting to see it in the numbers.” So far, the numbers are mostly negative in terms of volume. ODFL’s average daily shipment (ADS) count dropped 7.9% year over year in the third quarter. At XPO, the ADS fell 3.5%, while Saia’s shipments dropped 1.9% from a year ago. “We are not yet seeing a demand recovery,” XPO’s Harik said, and he doesn’t expect one in the fourth quarter. “Customers expect the market to be steady” through the end of 2025, he said. “Things aren’t getting better, but they’re not getting worse.” Customers do expect improvement in 2026, Harik said. For one, a drop in the federal funds rate could stimulate industrial demand and more corporate investment. “We have all these tailwinds,” he said. Established strategies ODFL, XPO and Saia are taking long-established approaches to the market as they wait for those tailwinds to blow. ODFL’s third-quarter decline in daily shipments was accompanied by a 4.3% annualized drop in revenue to $1.4 billion. The company remains highly profitable despite a 12.2% drop in net profit to $271 million, with a 74.3% operating ratio. ODFL has consistently been willing to protect its bottom line at the expense of top-line revenue, maintaining a premium price to protect profit margin rather than trying to use price to gain market share — a model many LTL carriers are trying to emulate. “We want to win market share; we don’t want to go out and try to take it,” said Satterfield. Saia’s revenue fell 0.3% year over year in the quarter to $839.6 million, while its net profit dropped 6.9% to $86.3 million. Its operating ratio rose slightly to 85.9%. Saia hopes to grow “share of wallet” by gaining new business from existing customers as it realigns its network, which has expanded nationwide with 39 new terminals since 2022, many of them purchased from Yellow. “It’s really not about how quickly we can grow shipment count for the sake of shipment count,” CFO Matthew Batteh said. XPO is adding new customers, onboarding 2,500 small business shippers in the third quarter and 7,500 year to date, Harik said. Those “local” customers now account for 25% of XPO’s LTL revenue, he said. The carrier is also gaining revenue from new premium services launched over the past year that carry a higher price, generating more revenue. XPO’s North American LTL revenue rose 0.3% to $1.3 billion. Operating income for the North American LTL business rose 9.6% to $217 million, although overall net income dropped 13.7% to $82 million. “We’re still in the early innings” of a freight recovery, Harik told analysts. “When the cycle starts turning, we’ll improve even more.” Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Top LTL carriers maintain profit while planning paths to freight recovery

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The migration of European carriers away from their traditional foreign “flags of convenience” to India’s emerging market is seen as a major maritime boost for New Delhi as it vigorously seeks private investment to drive economic growth.</div>

The migration of European carriers away from their traditional foreign “flags of convenience” to India’s emerging market is seen as a major maritime boost for New Delhi as it vigorously seeks private investment to drive economic growth.

<div class="phx-topic">Mediterranean Shipping Co. has become the latest major ocean carrier to invest beyond port-to-port shipping and inland logistics operations in India. The world’s largest liner operator has confirmed a program to reflag 12 of its container ships to the Indian registry, <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fmaersk-joins-cma-cgm-in-reflagging-container-ships-in-india-amid-antitrust-pressure-6104614&amp;data=05%7C02%7Ckevin.saville2%40spglobal.com%7Ce25119e77e48409f9fd008de1afbe98d%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C638977866451687870%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=ATLTeE4VZiT%2FdEk4u7KDaKfZ6tz6lsNZ648tVwEVkE4%3D&amp;reserved=0">adding to the wave of recent similar flag changes already carried out by CMA CGM and Maersk</a>. In a LinkedIn post Monday, MSC CEO Soren Toft said the planned Indian-flagged fleet operation “strengthens the company’s long-term partnership and support for India’s maritime ambitions.” “India is a key country for MSC, with continued strong development across shipping, ports and logistics,” Toft noted. Details of the vessels to be registered in India were not immediately disclosed. Efforts to seek comment from officials at MSC (India) were unsuccessful. <h3>Boost for New Delhi</h3>MSC’s reflagging move was another key industry investment commitment unfolded at <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fdp-world-lines-up-5-billion-investment-program-for-india-expansion-6106499&amp;data=05%7C02%7Ckevin.saville2%40spglobal.com%7Ce25119e77e48409f9fd008de1afbe98d%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C638977866451709845%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=CI4%2FOl11z7UXiroHYAMAqcQMiEMmlWAuZOMn%2FPwT%2F%2FQ%3D&amp;reserved=0">the recent maritime summit in Mumbai.</a> The migration of European carriers away from their traditional cost-saving foreign “flags of convenience” to India’s emerging market is seen as a major maritime boost for New Delhi as it vigorously seeks private investment to drive economic growth through a buildup of manufacturing and export verticals. Additionally, carrier collaborations <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fcma-cgm-signs-350-million-indian-shipbuilding-order-for-six-box-ships-6097779&amp;data=05%7C02%7Ckevin.saville2%40spglobal.com%7Ce25119e77e48409f9fd008de1afbe98d%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C638977866451727877%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=%2FDyTYJQw5D4RIVSbQMl9WMVuKyoBpeTzvxQI%2FT3TmeE%3D&amp;reserved=0">with Indian shipbuilding yards are gathering pace</a>, with the lead taken by Maersk and CMA CGM. MSC was reportedly weighing similar interest following Toft’s meeting with Indian government leaders earlier this year. MSC is the largest ocean carrier out of India, with growing landside investment interests that include container terminal partnerships with Adani at Mundra and Ennore (Chennai). The carrier handles large-scale regional transshipment volumes at Mundra as well as Vizhinjam Port, India’s newest container hub that is also managed by Adani. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>.</div>

Mediterranean Shipping Co. has become the latest major ocean carrier to invest beyond port-to-port shipping and inland logistics operations in India. The world’s largest liner operator has confirmed a program to reflag 12 of its container ships to the Indian registry, adding to the wave of recent similar flag changes already carried out by CMA CGM and Maersk . In a LinkedIn post Monday, MSC CEO Soren Toft said the planned Indian-flagged fleet operation “strengthens the company’s long-term partnership and support for India’s maritime ambitions.” “India is a key country for MSC, with continued strong development across shipping, ports and logistics,” Toft noted. Details of the vessels to be registered in India were not immediately disclosed. Efforts to seek comment from officials at MSC (India) were unsuccessful. Boost for New Delhi MSC’s reflagging move was another key industry investment commitment unfolded at the recent maritime summit in Mumbai. The migration of European carriers away from their traditional cost-saving foreign “flags of convenience” to India’s emerging market is seen as a major maritime boost for New Delhi as it vigorously seeks private investment to drive economic growth through a buildup of manufacturing and export verticals. Additionally, carrier collaborations with Indian shipbuilding yards are gathering pace , with the lead taken by Maersk and CMA CGM. MSC was reportedly weighing similar interest following Toft’s meeting with Indian government leaders earlier this year. MSC is the largest ocean carrier out of India, with growing landside investment interests that include container terminal partnerships with Adani at Mundra and Ennore (Chennai). The carrier handles large-scale regional transshipment volumes at Mundra as well as Vizhinjam Port, India’s newest container hub that is also managed by Adani. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

North American ports

Marine terminals

MSC agrees to reflag 12 container ships in India in diversification push

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The largest US intermodal provider’s relationships with competing eastern railroads Norfolk Southern and CSX are shifting and will continue evolving through 2026 as the proposed merger between NS and UP winds its way through the regulatory process. </div>

The largest US intermodal provider’s relationships with competing eastern railroads Norfolk Southern and CSX are shifting and will continue evolving through 2026 as the proposed merger between NS and UP winds its way through the regulatory process.

<div class="phx-topic">If federal regulators approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) proposed $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), J.B. Hunt Transport Services — the largest US intermodal provider — could be forced to rethink how it routes both coast-to-coast and East Coast freight. J.B. Hunt’s relationships with Norfolk Southern and CSX Transportation are already shifting and will continue evolving through 2026. How much will change is unclear, however, as J.B. Hunt wants relationships with both eastern railroads, even if Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern become one. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6105166_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The stakes couldn’t be higher. J.B. Hunt handles more than two million intermodal loads a year and controls more than 125,000 containers, a fleet larger than the combined totals of competing intermodal providers C.H. Robinson, Hub Group, Schneider National, Swift Intermodal and several peers. On the West Coast, J.B. Hunt and BNSF Railway operate under the long-standing Quantum Agreement, a joint-service partnership created more than 35 years ago. In the East, J.B. relies primarily on Norfolk Southern, but has steadily expanded its CSX footprint in recent years. If UP acquired NS, some industry analysts have speculated J.B. Hunt would shift everything to CSX. The premise is based on the budding relationship between BNSF and CSX. “[It] has been perceived that J.B. Hunt would have to move our traffic to CSX. That’s not accurate at all,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on an Oct. 16 earnings call. “There’s nothing [about the merger] that would mean our current Norfolk Southern footprint we have today would be required to change.” In a sense, though, the relationship has already begun to change. J.B. Hunt uses the new BNSF-CSX service launched in September from Phoenix to Atlanta and Southern California to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bnsf-csx-unveil-new-joint-intermodal-lanes-in-aftermath-of-up-ns-merger-6067789">Charlotte and Jacksonville</a>. Other BNSF and CSX combinations could include J.B. Hunt along the way. NS referenced the J.B. Hunt volume loss in the Southeast during its most recent earnings call. “While not big in the third quarter, we started to see some of the revenue erosion from competitor reactions to the merger,” NS CEO Mark George said on the Oct. 24 call. “We expect the impact to grow in the fourth quarter and continue to be a challenge over the near and medium term.” BNSF, which has waged a campaign against the UP-NS merger, warns that 300 intermodal lanes <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ceo-pushing-to-file-formal-ns-merger-application-by-dec-1-6102362">could vanish</a> if the deal is approved, including all BNSF-NS interchanges. Likewise, CSX has said publicly that collaboration, not consolidation, can address the reasons why shippers still choose trucks over rail. J.B. Hunt is unlikely to take sides to keep the peace with NS and CSX. “Our long-term agreements and strong relationships with NS, CSX and BNSF should provide the basis for us to adapt to any changes in the industry,” J.B. Hunt CEO Shelley Simpson said on the company’s Oct. 16 earnings call. Strong rail service is one reason why J.B. Hunt grew its local East Coast intermodal volume by <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/jb-hunt-intermodal-volume-retracts-amid-cost-cutting-measures-6098480">6% year over year</a> in the third quarter, while West Coast freight dropped 6% during the same period. <h3>Norfolk Southern remains crucial </h3>The gravitational pull to BNSF and CSX is expected to strengthen in 2026. One industry source, who asked not to be identified, told the Journal of Commerce that J.B. Hunt is involved in every BNSF-CSX discussion on joint services, providing volume commitments to bolster the products from the outset. Nevertheless, NS remains central to J.B. Hunt’s eastern network. More than half of J.B. Hunt’s business with NS remains in the eastern US, according to the railroad. NS provides J.B. Hunt with access to major distribution centers strewn across central Pennsylvania, including Allentown, Bethlehem and Harrisburg. CSX cannot replicate that opportunity. NS also provides a single-line service between Kansas City and the East Coast, while CSX doesn’t operate in Kansas City. And the separate Crescent Corridor serves as a competitive edge — a double-stack-cleared NS route from Memphis through Birmingham, Atlanta, Charlotte and Harrisburg to Newark — providing faster transits than CSX on high-volume routes. UP has also offered to honor the J.B. Hunt-Norfolk Southern partnership. “If J.B. Hunt wants to still do lanes within the East with Norfolk Southern like they do today, we’ll certainly let them do that,” UP CEO Jim Vena said at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland 2025 Distribution Conference on Oct. 1. The UP-J.B. Hunt relationship makes sense for both sides. UP retains access to a large number of intermodal shipments, while J.B. Hunt can continue to provide truck-competitive services to shippers. <h3>The CSX pull will only grow </h3>The pull toward CSX will intensify, however, as its partnership with BNSF expands. With Southeast service now live, BNSF and CSX are eyeing the Northeast. CSX’s double-stack clearance through Baltimore <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/csx-restarts-baltimore-tunnel-service-for-double-stack-in-2026-6087384">next spring</a> could unlock additional joint BNSF-CSX routes from Southern California to Philadelphia and Newark, covering nearly every major East Coast hub from Florida to New Jersey. Striking such a deal makes economic sense for all parties. Details of the BNSF-J.B. Hunt Quantum Agreement are limited, but it functions as a one-of-a-kind intermodal revenue-sharing model. The formula has never been disclosed, but Quantum links BNSF and J.B. Hunt’s profitability to the volume on their intermodal lanes. If BNSF secures favorable terms with CSX, then everyone stands to benefit. The pool of revenue split between BNSF and J.B. Hunt is higher, especially if CSX charges less than NS. If a deal includes a seamless interchange, such as the one in Birmingham, for example, then J.B. Hunt’s expenses are lower, also increasing the shared revenue pool. And CSX wins by taking market share away from NS, its chief rival. J.B. Hunt must tread carefully, deepening its CSX ties without severing them with Norfolk Southern. That two-way pressure could spur both eastern railroads to compete harder, ultimately benefiting shippers along the way. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

If federal regulators approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) proposed $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), J.B. Hunt Transport Services — the largest US intermodal provider — could be forced to rethink how it routes both coast-to-coast and East Coast freight. J.B. Hunt’s relationships with Norfolk Southern and CSX Transportation are already shifting and will continue evolving through 2026. How much will change is unclear, however, as J.B. Hunt wants relationships with both eastern railroads, even if Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern become one. The stakes couldn’t be higher. J.B. Hunt handles more than two million intermodal loads a year and controls more than 125,000 containers, a fleet larger than the combined totals of competing intermodal providers C.H. Robinson, Hub Group, Schneider National, Swift Intermodal and several peers. On the West Coast, J.B. Hunt and BNSF Railway operate under the long-standing Quantum Agreement, a joint-service partnership created more than 35 years ago. In the East, J.B. relies primarily on Norfolk Southern, but has steadily expanded its CSX footprint in recent years. If UP acquired NS, some industry analysts have speculated J.B. Hunt would shift everything to CSX. The premise is based on the budding relationship between BNSF and CSX. “[It] has been perceived that J.B. Hunt would have to move our traffic to CSX. That’s not accurate at all,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on an Oct. 16 earnings call. “There’s nothing [about the merger] that would mean our current Norfolk Southern footprint we have today would be required to change.” In a sense, though, the relationship has already begun to change. J.B. Hunt uses the new BNSF-CSX service launched in September from Phoenix to Atlanta and Southern California to Charlotte and Jacksonville . Other BNSF and CSX combinations could include J.B. Hunt along the way. NS referenced the J.B. Hunt volume loss in the Southeast during its most recent earnings call. “While not big in the third quarter, we started to see some of the revenue erosion from competitor reactions to the merger,” NS CEO Mark George said on the Oct. 24 call. “We expect the impact to grow in the fourth quarter and continue to be a challenge over the near and medium term.” BNSF, which has waged a campaign against the UP-NS merger, warns that 300 intermodal lanes could vanish if the deal is approved, including all BNSF-NS interchanges. Likewise, CSX has said publicly that collaboration, not consolidation, can address the reasons why shippers still choose trucks over rail. J.B. Hunt is unlikely to take sides to keep the peace with NS and CSX. “Our long-term agreements and strong relationships with NS, CSX and BNSF should provide the basis for us to adapt to any changes in the industry,” J.B. Hunt CEO Shelley Simpson said on the company’s Oct. 16 earnings call. Strong rail service is one reason why J.B. Hunt grew its local East Coast intermodal volume by 6% year over year in the third quarter, while West Coast freight dropped 6% during the same period. Norfolk Southern remains crucial The gravitational pull to BNSF and CSX is expected to strengthen in 2026. One industry source, who asked not to be identified, told the Journal of Commerce that J.B. Hunt is involved in every BNSF-CSX discussion on joint services, providing volume commitments to bolster the products from the outset. Nevertheless, NS remains central to J.B. Hunt’s eastern network. More than half of J.B. Hunt’s business with NS remains in the eastern US, according to the railroad. NS provides J.B. Hunt with access to major distribution centers strewn across central Pennsylvania, including Allentown, Bethlehem and Harrisburg. CSX cannot replicate that opportunity. NS also provides a single-line service between Kansas City and the East Coast, while CSX doesn’t operate in Kansas City. And the separate Crescent Corridor serves as a competitive edge — a double-stack-cleared NS route from Memphis through Birmingham, Atlanta, Charlotte and Harrisburg to Newark — providing faster transits than CSX on high-volume routes. UP has also offered to honor the J.B. Hunt-Norfolk Southern partnership. “If J.B. Hunt wants to still do lanes within the East with Norfolk Southern like they do today, we’ll certainly let them do that,” UP CEO Jim Vena said at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland 2025 Distribution Conference on Oct. 1. The UP-J.B. Hunt relationship makes sense for both sides. UP retains access to a large number of intermodal shipments, while J.B. Hunt can continue to provide truck-competitive services to shippers. The CSX pull will only grow The pull toward CSX will intensify, however, as its partnership with BNSF expands. With Southeast service now live, BNSF and CSX are eyeing the Northeast. CSX’s double-stack clearance through Baltimore next spring could unlock additional joint BNSF-CSX routes from Southern California to Philadelphia and Newark, covering nearly every major East Coast hub from Florida to New Jersey. Striking such a deal makes economic sense for all parties. Details of the BNSF-J.B. Hunt Quantum Agreement are limited, but it functions as a one-of-a-kind intermodal revenue-sharing model. The formula has never been disclosed, but Quantum links BNSF and J.B. Hunt’s profitability to the volume on their intermodal lanes. If BNSF secures favorable terms with CSX, then everyone stands to benefit. The pool of revenue split between BNSF and J.B. Hunt is higher, especially if CSX charges less than NS. If a deal includes a seamless interchange, such as the one in Birmingham, for example, then J.B. Hunt’s expenses are lower, also increasing the shared revenue pool. And CSX wins by taking market share away from NS, its chief rival. J.B. Hunt must tread carefully, deepening its CSX ties without severing them with Norfolk Southern. That two-way pressure could spur both eastern railroads to compete harder, ultimately benefiting shippers along the way. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

J.B. Hunt’s East Coast strategy is shifting as rail alliances realign

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">An immediate bump in cargo is likely in the wake of this week’s deal between Washington and Beijing, but it’s too early for US retailers who are tied to China to make supply chain decisions for 2026 spring and summer imports. </div>

An immediate bump in cargo is likely in the wake of this week’s deal between Washington and Beijing, but it’s too early for US retailers who are tied to China to make supply chain decisions for 2026 spring and summer imports.

<div class="phx-topic">The US-China trade deal announced this week will prompt some US retailers to move quickly on imports they need in the short term, but the seemingly tenuous nature of the agreement — notably its one-year term — will likely prevent a broad shift back to traditional ordering patterns, market participants say. “If it’s needed now, it will be ordered. Longer term, retailers need more time. There will be hesitancy,” an industry consultant who managed the logistics departments of two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. Revelyst, an importer of outdoor gear, immediately shifted imports that it had scheduled to ship by air beginning Nov. 1 back to ocean mode after the US-China deal. “We’ll save a good deal of money,” said John Pace, the company’s senior manager of logistics. In the longer term, even with the deal’s elimination of the 10% so-called “fentanyl tax” on imports from China, the total tariff on most imports from China is about 47%, which is higher than tariffs on most countries in Asia. As such, Revelyst will continue to explore sourcing options from countries such as Vietnam, Pace said. The broad agreement <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-china-suspend-reciprocal-port-fees-as-part-of-wider-trade-deal-6105849">announced Thursday</a> also included a one-year pause in the reciprocal port fees the US and China had implemented on Oct. 14. The National Retail Federation (NRF), which represents a broad range of retailers, said a bump in imports in the short term is likely in the wake of the deal, but that it is too early for retailers who are tied to China to make supply chain decisions for spring and summer imports in 2026. “The challenge for retailers is there’s still so much uncertainty about what’s going to come out and when it’s going to come out,” said Jonathan Gold, NRF’s vice president of supply chain and customs policy. Many details relating to tariffs on important commodities such as steel, aluminum, automobiles and lumber, when Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will begin to collect duties, and what the status is of duties that have already been collected are still uncertain, Gold said. Jason Cook, CEO of the forwarder Ardent Global Logistics, said there’s been hesitancy over the past two months among retailers and direct importers to ship seasonal merchandise and replenishment product for fear the US-China talks would break down and the huge tariffs would remain in place. But those fears have been allayed, at least for now. “So make up for the hesitation and bring in as much inventory as possible in case things blow up again,” Cook said. <h3>Some importers keep supply chain strategy unchanged </h3>Still, some importers say their ordering patterns have not really been affected by the trade agreement. A national furniture retailer said the company earlier this year set its logistics plan and sourcing patterns for 2025, has stuck with those plans, and has no regrets for doing so. “The fact that major decisions are being made in such a knee-jerk fashion has us scared,” said the furniture retailer’s logistics manager. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="e8c13a3e-9f5a-412f-8741-adbf5e1a7779"></dynamic-object></div>An importer in the automotive sector said he has no intention of increasing imports from China. “A 10% [tariff] change is not material enough to make a switch,” the source said. “The overall rates are still very high.” <h3>Prior GRIs boosted rates in October </h3>Imports from all of Asia have remained relatively strong this fall even though carriers have been successful in propping up freight rates through a series of general rate increases (GRIs). Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, pegged Asia-West Coast rates at $2,075 per FEU as of Oct. 30, up from $1,300 earlier in the month as an Oct. 1 GRI was taking hold. Rates to the East Coast have risen to $3,075 per FEU from $2,260 over the same period. Trans-Pacific carriers pre-filed GRIs to take effect on Nov. 1, and so far the alliance carriers have been holding on to the intended rate hike, said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to forwarders. Most, but not all, carriers are posting rates of $3,800 per FEU to the East Coast and $2,800 per FEU to the West Coast this weekend, Monroe said. “It looks like carriers are holding it together publicly but privately they’re cutting deals,” he said. Importers and forwarders who utilize so-called bullet rates and on-line rates from individual carriers can save about $300 to $400 per FEU, according to Monroe. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="6a6ec157-c71e-4ab2-ae59-6658aada11d8"></dynamic-object></div>Carriers have succeeded in propping up rates by reducing capacity in the trans-Pacific through blank sailings, but reduced blanks scheduled so far for November could result in additional capacity being available. The blanking rate to the West Coast so far for November is 8.2% of capacity, down from 20.8% in October, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Similarly, blanked capacity from Asia to the East Coast is pegged thus far at 10.9% for November, down from 22.8% in October. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The US-China trade deal announced this week will prompt some US retailers to move quickly on imports they need in the short term, but the seemingly tenuous nature of the agreement — notably its one-year term — will likely prevent a broad shift back to traditional ordering patterns, market participants say. “If it’s needed now, it will be ordered. Longer term, retailers need more time. There will be hesitancy,” an industry consultant who managed the logistics departments of two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. Revelyst, an importer of outdoor gear, immediately shifted imports that it had scheduled to ship by air beginning Nov. 1 back to ocean mode after the US-China deal. “We’ll save a good deal of money,” said John Pace, the company’s senior manager of logistics. In the longer term, even with the deal’s elimination of the 10% so-called “fentanyl tax” on imports from China, the total tariff on most imports from China is about 47%, which is higher than tariffs on most countries in Asia. As such, Revelyst will continue to explore sourcing options from countries such as Vietnam, Pace said. The broad agreement announced Thursday also included a one-year pause in the reciprocal port fees the US and China had implemented on Oct. 14. The National Retail Federation (NRF), which represents a broad range of retailers, said a bump in imports in the short term is likely in the wake of the deal, but that it is too early for retailers who are tied to China to make supply chain decisions for spring and summer imports in 2026. “The challenge for retailers is there’s still so much uncertainty about what’s going to come out and when it’s going to come out,” said Jonathan Gold, NRF’s vice president of supply chain and customs policy. Many details relating to tariffs on important commodities such as steel, aluminum, automobiles and lumber, when Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will begin to collect duties, and what the status is of duties that have already been collected are still uncertain, Gold said. Jason Cook, CEO of the forwarder Ardent Global Logistics, said there’s been hesitancy over the past two months among retailers and direct importers to ship seasonal merchandise and replenishment product for fear the US-China talks would break down and the huge tariffs would remain in place. But those fears have been allayed, at least for now. “So make up for the hesitation and bring in as much inventory as possible in case things blow up again,” Cook said. Some importers keep supply chain strategy unchanged Still, some importers say their ordering patterns have not really been affected by the trade agreement. A national furniture retailer said the company earlier this year set its logistics plan and sourcing patterns for 2025, has stuck with those plans, and has no regrets for doing so. “The fact that major decisions are being made in such a knee-jerk fashion has us scared,” said the furniture retailer’s logistics manager. An importer in the automotive sector said he has no intention of increasing imports from China. “A 10% [tariff] change is not material enough to make a switch,” the source said. “The overall rates are still very high.” Prior GRIs boosted rates in October Imports from all of Asia have remained relatively strong this fall even though carriers have been successful in propping up freight rates through a series of general rate increases (GRIs). Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, pegged Asia-West Coast rates at $2,075 per FEU as of Oct. 30, up from $1,300 earlier in the month as an Oct. 1 GRI was taking hold. Rates to the East Coast have risen to $3,075 per FEU from $2,260 over the same period. Trans-Pacific carriers pre-filed GRIs to take effect on Nov. 1, and so far the alliance carriers have been holding on to the intended rate hike, said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to forwarders. Most, but not all, carriers are posting rates of $3,800 per FEU to the East Coast and $2,800 per FEU to the West Coast this weekend, Monroe said. “It looks like carriers are holding it together publicly but privately they’re cutting deals,” he said. Importers and forwarders who utilize so-called bullet rates and on-line rates from individual carriers can save about $300 to $400 per FEU, according to Monroe. Carriers have succeeded in propping up rates by reducing capacity in the trans-Pacific through blank sailings, but reduced blanks scheduled so far for November could result in additional capacity being available. The blanking rate to the West Coast so far for November is 8.2% of capacity, down from 20.8% in October, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Similarly, blanked capacity from Asia to the East Coast is pegged thus far at 10.9% for November, down from 22.8% in October. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com . Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .

Tariffs, energy policy changes force US ports to rethink project cargo strategies

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

Soft demand in eastbound trans-Pacific overwhelms carriers’ GRI attempt

Intermodal savings rose in Q3, but might not yield high rates in ‘26

Year-long pause on US port fees targeting China vessels to start Nov. 10

Recent Commentary

UP-NS merger could mean new dominant voice inside rail industry cooperative

Visibility transforming accessorial and location insights in LTL shipping

Top 5 Most Read Stories