<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The carrier announced in March it would spend $20 billion over the next four years to significantly bolster its logistics presence in the US, including expanding its US-flag fleet and increasing capacity at key US ports.</div>

The carrier announced in March it would spend $20 billion over the next four years to significantly bolster its logistics presence in the US, including expanding its US-flag fleet and increasing capacity at key US ports.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">CMA CGM said Thursday it has reflagged its 9,300-TEU container ship Phoenix under the US flag, the first of four ships that will be so flagged this year as the carrier looks to triple the size of its US fleet to 30 over the next four years. The reflagging of the Phoenix — the largest container vessel to ever sail under the US flag, occurred in Charleston, CMA CGM said in a statement. The ship will be used on the carrier's Indamex service that connects the US East Coast with India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The Marseille-based liner is owner of the US flag carrier American President Lines (APL). In March following a White House meeting with President Donald Trump, Rodolph Saade, head of CMA CGM Group, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-to-invest-20-billion-in-us-shipping-ports-and-logistics-5957748">announced the company would spend $20 billion</a> over the next four years to significantly bolster its logistics presence in the US, including expanding its US-flag fleet and increasing capacity at key US ports. ”By expanding our US-flagged fleet, we will create new jobs, support American exports, and help strengthen the nation’s maritime capabilities for years to come,” Adeline Franger Chouraqui, CEO of CMA CGM America, said in the statement. Each of the four vessels to be reflagged this year will have a capacity of 9,300 TEU. The delivery of the four ships will allow CMA CGM to increase the number of American seafarers it employs by 50%, the carrier said. Contact Kevin Saville at <a href="mailto:kevin.saville2@spglobal.com">kevin.saville2@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

CMA CGM said Thursday it has reflagged its 9,300-TEU container ship Phoenix under the US flag, the first of four ships that will be so flagged this year as the carrier looks to triple the size of its US fleet to 30 over the next four years. The reflagging of the Phoenix — the largest container vessel to ever sail under the US flag, occurred in Charleston, CMA CGM said in a statement. The ship will be used on the carrier's Indamex service that connects the US East Coast with India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The Marseille-based liner is owner of the US flag carrier American President Lines (APL). In March following a White House meeting with President Donald Trump, Rodolph Saade, head of CMA CGM Group, announced the company would spend $20 billion over the next four years to significantly bolster its logistics presence in the US, including expanding its US-flag fleet and increasing capacity at key US ports. ”By expanding our US-flagged fleet, we will create new jobs, support American exports, and help strengthen the nation’s maritime capabilities for years to come,” Adeline Franger Chouraqui, CEO of CMA CGM America, said in the statement. Each of the four vessels to be reflagged this year will have a capacity of 9,300 TEU. The delivery of the four ships will allow CMA CGM to increase the number of American seafarers it employs by 50%, the carrier said. Contact Kevin Saville at kevin.saville2@spglobal.com .

Maritime

Container Shipping News

Container lines

CMA CGM reflags vessel in first move to boost size of US fleet

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Volumes from Oceania to the US East Coast have grown steadily during the past five years, with this June recording the most imports ever for a single month.</div>

Volumes from Oceania to the US East Coast have grown steadily during the past five years, with this June recording the most imports ever for a single month.

<div class="phx-topic">Mediterranean Shipping Co. will launch a new direct weekly service between the US East Coast and Oceania in February, boosting total monthly sailings on the small but expanding trade lane by approximately one-quarter. The standalone service, announced Wednesday, will be called the Eagle Service and serve several ports in Australia and New Zealand, with additional stops through the Panama Canal. It will include 11 vessels, but MSC declined to comment on how much capacity the service will bring to the trade. The full rotation includes Philadelphia, Savannah, Freeport, Rodman, Papeete, Auckland, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Tauranga, Rodman and Cristobal, before returning to Philadelphia. Volumes from Oceania to the US East Coast have grown steadily during the past five years. Between 2020 and 2024, data from PIERS shows the compound annual growth rate for USEC volumes from Oceania was 5.2%, rising to 108,198 TEUs in 2025 from 84,120 TEUs in 2020. PIERS is a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. US imports to the East Coast from Oceania reached an all-time high for a single month in June, with 10,384 TEUs, up 6.3% year over year. April 2025 is the only other month when US imports from Oceania have exceeded 10,000 TEUs, PIERS data shows. Through the first half of 2025, Maersk has had the largest presence among carriers on the USEC-Oceania trade lane, with CMA CGM and MSC coming in second and third place, respectively. Maersk’s first-half imports from Oceania to the US East Coast alone exceeded the total TEUs carried on the trade by CMA CGM and MSC individually. Maritime intelligence provider eeSea shows four services consistently present on the trade lane since 2022, averaging about 13 to 14 sailings per month for the first seven months of 2025. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  </div>

Mediterranean Shipping Co. will launch a new direct weekly service between the US East Coast and Oceania in February, boosting total monthly sailings on the small but expanding trade lane by approximately one-quarter. The standalone service, announced Wednesday, will be called the Eagle Service and serve several ports in Australia and New Zealand, with additional stops through the Panama Canal. It will include 11 vessels, but MSC declined to comment on how much capacity the service will bring to the trade. The full rotation includes Philadelphia, Savannah, Freeport, Rodman, Papeete, Auckland, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Tauranga, Rodman and Cristobal, before returning to Philadelphia. Volumes from Oceania to the US East Coast have grown steadily during the past five years. Between 2020 and 2024, data from PIERS shows the compound annual growth rate for USEC volumes from Oceania was 5.2%, rising to 108,198 TEUs in 2025 from 84,120 TEUs in 2020. PIERS is a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. US imports to the East Coast from Oceania reached an all-time high for a single month in June, with 10,384 TEUs, up 6.3% year over year. April 2025 is the only other month when US imports from Oceania have exceeded 10,000 TEUs, PIERS data shows. Through the first half of 2025, Maersk has had the largest presence among carriers on the USEC-Oceania trade lane, with CMA CGM and MSC coming in second and third place, respectively. Maersk’s first-half imports from Oceania to the US East Coast alone exceeded the total TEUs carried on the trade by CMA CGM and MSC individually. Maritime intelligence provider eeSea shows four services consistently present on the trade lane since 2022, averaging about 13 to 14 sailings per month for the first seven months of 2025. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com . 

Trans-Pacific

MSC to launch new USEC-Oceania weekly service in February

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Any tie-up between the two railroads would be classified as a “major transaction” under US Surface Transportation Board regulations and subject to a rigorous review that could take two to three years. </div>

Any tie-up between the two railroads would be classified as a “major transaction” under US Surface Transportation Board regulations and subject to a rigorous review that could take two to three years.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Norfolk Southern (NS) confirmed Thursday they are in “advanced discussions” on a possible merger to create a transcontinental railroad, although UP officials declined to offer further details during a second-quarter earnings call. UP CEO Jim Vena cautioned that there are no assurances a deal will be reached. Any tie-up <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/potential-up-ns-tie-up-would-cause-major-shift-in-us-intermodal-market-6046025">between the two railroads</a> would be classified as a “major transaction” under US Surface Transportation Board regulations and subject to a rigorous review that could take two to three years. “We didn’t wake up one morning and say we’re going to do something like we just announced that we’re in discussion,” Vena told analysts. “We’ve done a lot of homework to get us to this place.” Vena declined to say how close the companies are to a deal or whether they have contacted federal regulators or the White House. “If you fundamentally have a railroad that’s operating the way we operate, then you can do things that help the nation, help our customers win, and that’s what it’s all about,” he said. “Everything else in the world is moving ahead ... If you stand still, you get left behind.” If a deal between UP and NS is announced and approved, it could benefit shippers of industrial and bulk goods, according to industry analysts with experience at Class I railroads. One analyst, who did not want to be identified, said the biggest gains would go to so-called “watershed” customers, meaning shippers that are located close to the operational networks of two railroads. Many of those shippers currently use trucks to avoid the delays and complications of handing freight between rail carriers. <h3>Differing views on intermodal impact </h3>A transaction between the two Class I railroads <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/potential-up-ns-tie-up-would-cause-major-shift-in-us-intermodal-market-6046025">would benefit Hub Group, Swift Intermodal, and parcel giant UPS</a>, which partner with both Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. But analysts differ on whether a transcontinental railroad would ease congestion in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and Kansas City, where trains are broken up and containers exchanged between carriers. UP and rival BNSF Railway build West Coast trains bound for Chicago with freight destined for both the Chicagoland area and the East Coast. Ramp workers must break up the trains, sort and organize the containers, then mount the boxes into a stack or route them to NS or CSX for onward delivery. It’s not unlike how dockworkers separate containers for local delivery from those headed inland, then further divide loads between railroads and move them to on-dock yards. Ted Prince, CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal, said he doesn’t believe much would change in gateway cities under a UP-NS merger. “The situation today in Chicago is not going to be any different after [a] merger,” Prince said. “A container traveling from Los Angeles to Philadelphia is still going to be sliced and diced in Chicago.” Prince also downplayed any impact on international intermodal freight, noting that ocean carriers tend to avoid expensive land-bridge routes in favor of all-water service to East Coast ports, followed by shorter drays. <h3>‘Untapped opportunities’ for intermodal </h3>But Paul Tonsager, a former Canadian National Railway executive, believes a potential merger could have an impact on the intermodal market. “Everyone is chomping at the bit to find ways around Chicago, and I cannot imagine Jim Vena getting into all of this without wanting to make his mark,” Tonsager said. “For example, Red Bull ships a lot from Phoenix to Philadelphia, but they don’t want to mess around with the railroad on this lane. We don’t know how much density is possible on such a lane, but with data and artificial intelligence, it’ll be much easier to find untapped opportunities.” He also sees potential to expand international intermodal business. “It’s inherent on the railroads to open up these opportunities and not be the historical barrier that they’ve been,” he said. “Would you spend $80 billion and just go ‘Okay, well I’m just going to operate the way I’ve always operated?’ I seriously doubt that. This is where the STB [Surface Transportation Board] can step in and push on the UP.” Federal regulators have the authority to impose conditions on major mergers. Railroads must show that a deal serves the public interest, reduces highway congestion and promotes competition. Other railroads, as well as non-intermodal shippers, are likely to use a possible merger as an opportunity to seek concessions from UP in exchange for public support. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Norfolk Southern (NS) confirmed Thursday they are in “advanced discussions” on a possible merger to create a transcontinental railroad, although UP officials declined to offer further details during a second-quarter earnings call. UP CEO Jim Vena cautioned that there are no assurances a deal will be reached. Any tie-up between the two railroads would be classified as a “major transaction” under US Surface Transportation Board regulations and subject to a rigorous review that could take two to three years. “We didn’t wake up one morning and say we’re going to do something like we just announced that we’re in discussion,” Vena told analysts. “We’ve done a lot of homework to get us to this place.” Vena declined to say how close the companies are to a deal or whether they have contacted federal regulators or the White House. “If you fundamentally have a railroad that’s operating the way we operate, then you can do things that help the nation, help our customers win, and that’s what it’s all about,” he said. “Everything else in the world is moving ahead ... If you stand still, you get left behind.” If a deal between UP and NS is announced and approved, it could benefit shippers of industrial and bulk goods, according to industry analysts with experience at Class I railroads. One analyst, who did not want to be identified, said the biggest gains would go to so-called “watershed” customers, meaning shippers that are located close to the operational networks of two railroads. Many of those shippers currently use trucks to avoid the delays and complications of handing freight between rail carriers. Differing views on intermodal impact A transaction between the two Class I railroads would benefit Hub Group, Swift Intermodal, and parcel giant UPS , which partner with both Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. But analysts differ on whether a transcontinental railroad would ease congestion in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and Kansas City, where trains are broken up and containers exchanged between carriers. UP and rival BNSF Railway build West Coast trains bound for Chicago with freight destined for both the Chicagoland area and the East Coast. Ramp workers must break up the trains, sort and organize the containers, then mount the boxes into a stack or route them to NS or CSX for onward delivery. It’s not unlike how dockworkers separate containers for local delivery from those headed inland, then further divide loads between railroads and move them to on-dock yards. Ted Prince, CEO of Tri-Cities Intermodal, said he doesn’t believe much would change in gateway cities under a UP-NS merger. “The situation today in Chicago is not going to be any different after [a] merger,” Prince said. “A container traveling from Los Angeles to Philadelphia is still going to be sliced and diced in Chicago.” Prince also downplayed any impact on international intermodal freight, noting that ocean carriers tend to avoid expensive land-bridge routes in favor of all-water service to East Coast ports, followed by shorter drays. ‘Untapped opportunities’ for intermodal But Paul Tonsager, a former Canadian National Railway executive, believes a potential merger could have an impact on the intermodal market. “Everyone is chomping at the bit to find ways around Chicago, and I cannot imagine Jim Vena getting into all of this without wanting to make his mark,” Tonsager said. “For example, Red Bull ships a lot from Phoenix to Philadelphia, but they don’t want to mess around with the railroad on this lane. We don’t know how much density is possible on such a lane, but with data and artificial intelligence, it’ll be much easier to find untapped opportunities.” He also sees potential to expand international intermodal business. “It’s inherent on the railroads to open up these opportunities and not be the historical barrier that they’ve been,” he said. “Would you spend $80 billion and just go ‘Okay, well I’m just going to operate the way I’ve always operated?’ I seriously doubt that. This is where the STB [Surface Transportation Board] can step in and push on the UP.” Federal regulators have the authority to impose conditions on major mergers. Railroads must show that a deal serves the public interest, reduces highway congestion and promotes competition. Other railroads, as well as non-intermodal shippers, are likely to use a possible merger as an opportunity to seek concessions from UP in exchange for public support. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Surface

Rail News

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

UP confirms in ‘advanced discussions’ on deal with Norfolk Southern

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The negative foreign exchange effects were most noticeable in the forwarder’s US dollar-denominated ocean freight business, where earnings fell sharply in the second quarter.</div>

The negative foreign exchange effects were most noticeable in the forwarder’s US dollar-denominated ocean freight business, where earnings fell sharply in the second quarter.

<div class="phx-topic">Kuehne + Nagel (K+N) Thursday reported above-market share growth in both air and ocean volumes in the first half of the year, although foreign currency headwinds weighed on the forwarder’s financial results. The negative foreign exchange effects were most noticeable in US dollar-denominated ocean freight. Despite a 20% increase in first-half ocean revenue to $5.9 billion and an 11% increase in second-quarter revenue to $2.8 billion, K+N’s earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) in the ocean segment fell 5% year over year to $462 million in the first half and slid 16% to $98 million in the second quarter. Markus Blanka-Graff, CFO for Swiss-based Kuehne + Nagel, described the currency headwinds as “one of the most significant developments” this year. “Since ‘Liberation Day’ at the start of Q2, we have seen the devaluation of our key functional currencies, the US dollar and Euro, relative to our reporting currency, the Swiss franc,” Blanka-Graff told analysts on a first-half earnings call, referring to the launch of the Trump administration’s new tariff policy. “The average exchange rate for these currencies declined by 8% and 4% year over year, respectively,” he added. “This resulted in a 6% EBIT headwind in the second quarter alone, or 3% on a half-year basis.” Total first-half revenue was up 12% at $15.7 billion and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) increased 4% to $1.5 billion, although overall EBIT fell 1% to $937 million and net profit slid 1% to $700 million. While Kuehne + Nagel has maintained its full-year profitability forecast, the currency effect saw the forwarder adjusting its EBIT guidance range from $1.9 billion to $2.2 billion to $1.8 billion to $2 billion. <h3>‘Solid operational performance’ </h3>Although the negative foreign exchange effects undermined its earnings, Kuehne + Nagel CEO Stefan Paul said the forwarder put in a “solid operational performance” in the first half. In the volatile demand and rate environment that followed President Donald Trump’s April 2 “Liberation Day,” when tariffs were rolled out on the US’ trading partners, Paul said Kuehne + Nagel was able to offset declining ocean volumes to and from the US with gains in other markets. Overall container volume rose 4% year over year in the first half to 2.1 million TEUs against market growth of 1%, with Kuehne + Nagel also reporting “substantial market share gains” on the trade route from Asia to Europe. “We gained a significant amount of new businesses in the RFQ [request for quotation] season during the first half and we are confident we will see the same pattern in the third and the fourth quarters,” Paul said. <h3>Strong growth in air cargo </h3>K+N’s air cargo division delivered a robust performance. Revenue of $4.6 billion in the first six months was up 11% year over year and EBITA rose 9% to $1 billion. EBIT was up 13% at $289 million while volume increased 7% year over year to 1.1 million tons. The market growth in air cargo in the first half was about 4%, Paul noted. Kuehne + Nagel reported strong growth in volume in most of its air freight verticals, particularly perishables, semiconductors and “hyperscalers” — IT equipment providing the cloud infrastructure that powers modern digital applications and services. Paul said hyperscalers was “a promising field” that Kuehne + Nagel was actively pursuing, with “quite a few” people from the high-tech sector employed by the company in the past few weeks to grow the business. “This vertical ... is growing significantly and we expect it will bring high single-digit growth to the air freight business going into the fourth quarter,” he said. Meanwhile, subdued demand in European markets dragged down earnings in K+N’s road logistics business. Revenue was flat year over year at $2.2 billion, but EBIT plunged 26% to $59 million. The acquisition of Spanish groupage logistics provider TDN was completed at the end of the second quarter, enabling Kuehne + Nagel to expand its regional coverage on the Iberian Peninsula. In K+N’s contract logistics division, the second quarter was the strongest in the history of the business unit, with revenue growing 5% year over year to just shy of $3 billion. However, foreign exchange effects saw EBIT falling 2% year over year to $125 million. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Kuehne + Nagel (K+N) Thursday reported above-market share growth in both air and ocean volumes in the first half of the year, although foreign currency headwinds weighed on the forwarder’s financial results. The negative foreign exchange effects were most noticeable in US dollar-denominated ocean freight. Despite a 20% increase in first-half ocean revenue to $5.9 billion and an 11% increase in second-quarter revenue to $2.8 billion, K+N’s earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) in the ocean segment fell 5% year over year to $462 million in the first half and slid 16% to $98 million in the second quarter. Markus Blanka-Graff, CFO for Swiss-based Kuehne + Nagel, described the currency headwinds as “one of the most significant developments” this year. “Since ‘Liberation Day’ at the start of Q2, we have seen the devaluation of our key functional currencies, the US dollar and Euro, relative to our reporting currency, the Swiss franc,” Blanka-Graff told analysts on a first-half earnings call, referring to the launch of the Trump administration’s new tariff policy. “The average exchange rate for these currencies declined by 8% and 4% year over year, respectively,” he added. “This resulted in a 6% EBIT headwind in the second quarter alone, or 3% on a half-year basis.” Total first-half revenue was up 12% at $15.7 billion and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) increased 4% to $1.5 billion, although overall EBIT fell 1% to $937 million and net profit slid 1% to $700 million. While Kuehne + Nagel has maintained its full-year profitability forecast, the currency effect saw the forwarder adjusting its EBIT guidance range from $1.9 billion to $2.2 billion to $1.8 billion to $2 billion. ‘Solid operational performance’ Although the negative foreign exchange effects undermined its earnings, Kuehne + Nagel CEO Stefan Paul said the forwarder put in a “solid operational performance” in the first half. In the volatile demand and rate environment that followed President Donald Trump’s April 2 “Liberation Day,” when tariffs were rolled out on the US’ trading partners, Paul said Kuehne + Nagel was able to offset declining ocean volumes to and from the US with gains in other markets. Overall container volume rose 4% year over year in the first half to 2.1 million TEUs against market growth of 1%, with Kuehne + Nagel also reporting “substantial market share gains” on the trade route from Asia to Europe. “We gained a significant amount of new businesses in the RFQ [request for quotation] season during the first half and we are confident we will see the same pattern in the third and the fourth quarters,” Paul said. Strong growth in air cargo K+N’s air cargo division delivered a robust performance. Revenue of $4.6 billion in the first six months was up 11% year over year and EBITA rose 9% to $1 billion. EBIT was up 13% at $289 million while volume increased 7% year over year to 1.1 million tons. The market growth in air cargo in the first half was about 4%, Paul noted. Kuehne + Nagel reported strong growth in volume in most of its air freight verticals, particularly perishables, semiconductors and “hyperscalers” — IT equipment providing the cloud infrastructure that powers modern digital applications and services. Paul said hyperscalers was “a promising field” that Kuehne + Nagel was actively pursuing, with “quite a few” people from the high-tech sector employed by the company in the past few weeks to grow the business. “This vertical ... is growing significantly and we expect it will bring high single-digit growth to the air freight business going into the fourth quarter,” he said. Meanwhile, subdued demand in European markets dragged down earnings in K+N’s road logistics business. Revenue was flat year over year at $2.2 billion, but EBIT plunged 26% to $59 million. The acquisition of Spanish groupage logistics provider TDN was completed at the end of the second quarter, enabling Kuehne + Nagel to expand its regional coverage on the Iberian Peninsula. In K+N’s contract logistics division, the second quarter was the strongest in the history of the business unit, with revenue growing 5% year over year to just shy of $3 billion. However, foreign exchange effects saw EBIT falling 2% year over year to $125 million. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Air Cargo

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Forwarding

Post-tariff foreign currency headwinds hit Kuehne + Nagel’s H1, Q2 profit

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Local freight forwarders have reported rate increases in the range of $300 to $500 per FEU month over month and expect further slight gains if the pace of demand remains steady.</div>

Local freight forwarders have reported rate increases in the range of $300 to $500 per FEU month over month and expect further slight gains if the pace of demand remains steady.

<div class="phx-topic">Container lines active on the India-Europe trades have been able to push short-term contract and spot rates noticeably higher in July, thanks to elevated bookings powered by the onset of peak shipping season, albeit milder than the normal pattern. Local freight forwarders have reported rate increases in the range of $300 to $500 per FEU month over month and expect further slight gains if the pace of demand remains steady. Sources who spoke with the Journal of Commerce pegged average booking prices from West India (Nhava Sheva/Mundra) to Felixstowe/London Gateway or Rotterdam at between $1,700 and $1,800 per TEU and $2,000 and $2,100 per FEU. Most premier services have their vessels fully booked to their westbound allocations for the next two weeks at least, according to forwarder sources. Sporadic schedule disruptions have in some part contributed to the space pressure. CMA CGM, which had a void call on its premier “Epic” routing last week, has suspended spot bookings for Indian loads to North Europe until the end of July, sources said. “Spot space on other India-Europe connections, including the Gemini network, is also either tight or sold out on their upcoming sailings as carriers are increasingly prioritizing service contract customers for the peak season,” a sales executive at a Mumbai-based forwarding house who did not want to be identified told the Journal of Commerce. “Vessels for August are also filling fast, so carriers are constantly adjusting spot rates.” Forwarders also believe anticipated overbooked sailings have the potential to cause cargo rollovers through the first half of August. <h3>Hapag-Lloyd plans Aug. 1 rate hike </h3>Meanwhile, Hapag-Lloyd plans to roll a $500-per-container increase into its published tariff rates for India-North Europe/Mediterranean trades beginning Aug 1. Maersk and CMA CGM set new freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates on July 15 with increases of the same level. Sources also said several carriers, particularly Hapag-Lloyd and Maersk, are experiencing tight availability of 20-foot boxes in Nhava Sheva and across certain inland container depots (ICDs) in northern India. August FAK rates published by Hapag-Lloyd for Nhava Sheva-North Europe bookings seem to reflect that scenario — at $2,139 per TEU and $1,778 per FEU. “For now, rates appear to be stable and slightly climbing, but much will depend on carriers’ vessel blanking strategies for August,” a second forwarder said. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>. </div>

Container lines active on the India-Europe trades have been able to push short-term contract and spot rates noticeably higher in July, thanks to elevated bookings powered by the onset of peak shipping season, albeit milder than the normal pattern. Local freight forwarders have reported rate increases in the range of $300 to $500 per FEU month over month and expect further slight gains if the pace of demand remains steady. Sources who spoke with the Journal of Commerce pegged average booking prices from West India (Nhava Sheva/Mundra) to Felixstowe/London Gateway or Rotterdam at between $1,700 and $1,800 per TEU and $2,000 and $2,100 per FEU. Most premier services have their vessels fully booked to their westbound allocations for the next two weeks at least, according to forwarder sources. Sporadic schedule disruptions have in some part contributed to the space pressure. CMA CGM, which had a void call on its premier “Epic” routing last week, has suspended spot bookings for Indian loads to North Europe until the end of July, sources said. “Spot space on other India-Europe connections, including the Gemini network, is also either tight or sold out on their upcoming sailings as carriers are increasingly prioritizing service contract customers for the peak season,” a sales executive at a Mumbai-based forwarding house who did not want to be identified told the Journal of Commerce. “Vessels for August are also filling fast, so carriers are constantly adjusting spot rates.” Forwarders also believe anticipated overbooked sailings have the potential to cause cargo rollovers through the first half of August. Hapag-Lloyd plans Aug. 1 rate hike Meanwhile, Hapag-Lloyd plans to roll a $500-per-container increase into its published tariff rates for India-North Europe/Mediterranean trades beginning Aug 1. Maersk and CMA CGM set new freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates on July 15 with increases of the same level. Sources also said several carriers, particularly Hapag-Lloyd and Maersk, are experiencing tight availability of 20-foot boxes in Nhava Sheva and across certain inland container depots (ICDs) in northern India. August FAK rates published by Hapag-Lloyd for Nhava Sheva-North Europe bookings seem to reflect that scenario — at $2,139 per TEU and $1,778 per FEU. “For now, rates appear to be stable and slightly climbing, but much will depend on carriers’ vessel blanking strategies for August,” a second forwarder said. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

Asia-Europe

India-Europe rates strengthen on peak season space demand, capacity cuts

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Asian Development Bank also warned in a note Wednesday that escalating tariffs and further trade friction would further dim intra-Asia growth prospects. </div>

The Asian Development Bank also warned in a note Wednesday that escalating tariffs and further trade friction would further dim intra-Asia growth prospects.

<div class="phx-topic">Intra-Asia trade risks being thrown into chaos if the US imposes hefty tariffs on goods from the region should current trade talks break down, Hutchison Port Holdings Trust (HPH Trust) warned Wednesday. While the Singapore-listed port operator, a subsidiary of Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison, was commenting before the Trump administration announced trade deals with three Asian countries — Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines — late Tuesday in the US, those countries still face significant levies on exports to the US. The Asian Development Bank also warned in a note Wednesday that escalating tariffs and further trade friction would further dim intra-Asia growth prospects. HPH Trust, which controls Hutchison’s Hong Kong and mainland China port interests, said the US government sent letters to several counties in Asia to increase pressure on them to conclude trade negotiations by an Aug. 1 deadline. “If these trade deals fail to materialize, the sudden reinstatement of higher tariffs and possible sectoral tariffs by the US could trigger fresh turmoil in global trade, particularly for intra-Asia trade,” HPH Trust said. The warning was included as part of the company’s first-half results announcement. In the agreements confirmed Wednesday, Japanese exports to the US will be charged a 15% tariff, down from a proposed 25% levy, while a 19% tariff will be added to imports from the Philippines. Indonesia will also have a 19% tariff added to its exports to the US, although that is down from the 32% the US said it would apply without a deal. But other major Asian exporters to the US, including South Korea and Thailand, have yet to agree to trade deals. South Korea and Malaysia both face a 25% tariff, with Thailand and Cambodia each looking at a 36% levy. Myanmar and Laos would have exports to the US taxed at 40%. Officials from the US and China, meanwhile, are due to meet next week in Stockholm to continue talks on a trade deal, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-china-discuss-tariff-deadline-extension-trump-reaches-philippines-deal-2025-07-22/">Reuters reported</a>. The US has imposed an Aug. 14 deadline for reaching a deal, without which Chinese goods could face a 145% US tariff. “Uneven progress in tariff negotiations and the potential expansion of tariffs to additional products could further disrupt trade activities and weigh on growth for the region,” said Dong He, chief economist at the regional government-backed ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO). AMRO is forecasting economic growth in the intra-Asia region to be 3.8% this year, slipping to 3.6% in 2026. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Intra-Asia trade risks being thrown into chaos if the US imposes hefty tariffs on goods from the region should current trade talks break down, Hutchison Port Holdings Trust (HPH Trust) warned Wednesday. While the Singapore-listed port operator, a subsidiary of Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison, was commenting before the Trump administration announced trade deals with three Asian countries — Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines — late Tuesday in the US, those countries still face significant levies on exports to the US. The Asian Development Bank also warned in a note Wednesday that escalating tariffs and further trade friction would further dim intra-Asia growth prospects. HPH Trust, which controls Hutchison’s Hong Kong and mainland China port interests, said the US government sent letters to several counties in Asia to increase pressure on them to conclude trade negotiations by an Aug. 1 deadline. “If these trade deals fail to materialize, the sudden reinstatement of higher tariffs and possible sectoral tariffs by the US could trigger fresh turmoil in global trade, particularly for intra-Asia trade,” HPH Trust said. The warning was included as part of the company’s first-half results announcement. In the agreements confirmed Wednesday, Japanese exports to the US will be charged a 15% tariff, down from a proposed 25% levy, while a 19% tariff will be added to imports from the Philippines. Indonesia will also have a 19% tariff added to its exports to the US, although that is down from the 32% the US said it would apply without a deal. But other major Asian exporters to the US, including South Korea and Thailand, have yet to agree to trade deals. South Korea and Malaysia both face a 25% tariff, with Thailand and Cambodia each looking at a 36% levy. Myanmar and Laos would have exports to the US taxed at 40%. Officials from the US and China, meanwhile, are due to meet next week in Stockholm to continue talks on a trade deal, Reuters reported . The US has imposed an Aug. 14 deadline for reaching a deal, without which Chinese goods could face a 145% US tariff. “Uneven progress in tariff negotiations and the potential expansion of tariffs to additional products could further disrupt trade activities and weigh on growth for the region,” said Dong He, chief economist at the regional government-backed ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO). AMRO is forecasting economic growth in the intra-Asia region to be 3.8% this year, slipping to 3.6% in 2026. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Intra-Asia trade faces fresh turmoil from potential hefty US tariffs: HPH Trust

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Creating a transcontinental railroad is a test of whether North American freight can become globally competitive before it’s leapfrogged by digital platforms, foreign investment and shifting supply chains. </div>

Creating a transcontinental railroad is a test of whether North American freight can become globally competitive before it’s leapfrogged by digital platforms, foreign investment and shifting supply chains.

<div class="phx-topic">Over three decades in rail and logistics — from opening Canadian National Railway’s (CN’s) China offices to overseeing over $1 billion a year in rail and truck procurement at Maersk — I’ve seen our industry at its best and most frustrating. These experiences taught me that success in freight isn’t about owning more track, it’s about making what you have work together, predictably and seamlessly. Coordination and integration — not just scale — unlock value in modern freight. That’s why I believe creating a transcontinental railroad isn’t just corporate consolidation. It’s a test of whether North American freight can become globally competitive before it’s leapfrogged by digital platforms, foreign investment and shifting supply chains. We’re in a global race. The real question is whether we’re ready to evolve from a fragmented, legacy-bound system into a digitally enabled, customer-centric network. Modal conversion is hard. At CN, we worked to divert truck volume onto rail. But at Coyote and Maersk, I saw the reverse — when unreliable interchange, visibility gaps and inconsistent service pushed freight back to the highway. Modal shift doesn’t stick unless the product performs across every touchpoint: drayage, chassis, dwell, and data. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/potential-up-ns-tie-up-would-cause-major-shift-in-us-intermodal-market-6046025">A transcontinental merger</a> would give coast-to-coast reach on their own rails. That’s not just a coverage map — it’s a reimagining of how service is delivered. It could finally make rail more competitive against truck movements, but only if the combined company behaves more like a platform and less like a legacy carrier. That means unifying schedules, data, and service metrics. But let’s be clear — railroads don’t have a great track record here. Past mergers often promised integration but delivered disruption: slower transit, misaligned systems and customer confusion. If the potential tie-up between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern becomes another top-down rebrand without operational and digital harmony, we’ll squander a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Today’s shippers expect predictive insights, not just tracking pings. Modern tools are raising the bar by providing predictive truck-rail diversion intelligence and transforming frontline operations into structured, searchable data. These aren’t bolt-ons; they’re rewiring how decisions get made and how freight gets moved. Railroads must embed this kind of intelligence into their operating DNA. Visibility is no longer a feature — it’s the product. <h3>‘Align incentives’ </h3>I worked with the Chinese Ministry of Railways to consider a Chengdu to Narvik, Norway, route — ultimately connecting to Halifax. Three-gauge changes, uncertain infrastructure and limited partners made it unachievable. But today, weekly trains run from Asia to Europe. The difference? Capital, coordination and a unified commercial mindset. That’s the blueprint we need. North America has the backbone of rail — what it lacks is connective tissue. A transcontinental railroad would give one network end-to-end visibility and control. Think the kind of integrated vision Cornelius Vanderbilt dreamed of. In the Gilded Age, railroads shaped economies and connected cities. Today’s equivalent is data integration and seamless execution. We don’t need more steel — we need more reliability. For shippers, that means fewer surprises and a more resilient supply chain. Handled correctly, this potential merger could rebuild a product that earns modal conversion — but only if we align incentives across the ecosystem. Every player must show up. Shortlines need to get in the game by pushing for digital handshakes, carload connectivity, and shared metrics. Intermodal marketing companies can bring data and customers to the table and help shape lane strategies and expectations. Steamship lines port-to-door are your future. Make inland rail performance a C-suite issue. Bulk/merchandise shippers should demand parity: carload deserves the same precision as intermodal. Finally, logistics tech and third-party logistics providers must embed intelligence into the freight fabric, not around it. Handled poorly, this could become another merger that burdens operations and alienates customers. In a world of AI-driven dispatch and predictive ETAs, the window to rewire American freight is closing fast. Connecting teams, systems and expectations matters more than just connecting rail lines. Modernize now or risk handing the next decade of North American freight to faster, more agile competitors. Freight isn’t just a cost center — it’s a competitive edge. We either lead or step aside. That’s why I support a transcontinental rail system. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO), and Patriot Rail. He can be reached at <a href="mailto:paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io">paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io</a>. </div>

Over three decades in rail and logistics — from opening Canadian National Railway’s (CN’s) China offices to overseeing over $1 billion a year in rail and truck procurement at Maersk — I’ve seen our industry at its best and most frustrating. These experiences taught me that success in freight isn’t about owning more track, it’s about making what you have work together, predictably and seamlessly. Coordination and integration — not just scale — unlock value in modern freight. That’s why I believe creating a transcontinental railroad isn’t just corporate consolidation. It’s a test of whether North American freight can become globally competitive before it’s leapfrogged by digital platforms, foreign investment and shifting supply chains. We’re in a global race. The real question is whether we’re ready to evolve from a fragmented, legacy-bound system into a digitally enabled, customer-centric network. Modal conversion is hard. At CN, we worked to divert truck volume onto rail. But at Coyote and Maersk, I saw the reverse — when unreliable interchange, visibility gaps and inconsistent service pushed freight back to the highway. Modal shift doesn’t stick unless the product performs across every touchpoint: drayage, chassis, dwell, and data. A transcontinental merger would give coast-to-coast reach on their own rails. That’s not just a coverage map — it’s a reimagining of how service is delivered. It could finally make rail more competitive against truck movements, but only if the combined company behaves more like a platform and less like a legacy carrier. That means unifying schedules, data, and service metrics. But let’s be clear — railroads don’t have a great track record here. Past mergers often promised integration but delivered disruption: slower transit, misaligned systems and customer confusion. If the potential tie-up between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern becomes another top-down rebrand without operational and digital harmony, we’ll squander a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Today’s shippers expect predictive insights, not just tracking pings. Modern tools are raising the bar by providing predictive truck-rail diversion intelligence and transforming frontline operations into structured, searchable data. These aren’t bolt-ons; they’re rewiring how decisions get made and how freight gets moved. Railroads must embed this kind of intelligence into their operating DNA. Visibility is no longer a feature — it’s the product. ‘Align incentives’ I worked with the Chinese Ministry of Railways to consider a Chengdu to Narvik, Norway, route — ultimately connecting to Halifax. Three-gauge changes, uncertain infrastructure and limited partners made it unachievable. But today, weekly trains run from Asia to Europe. The difference? Capital, coordination and a unified commercial mindset. That’s the blueprint we need. North America has the backbone of rail — what it lacks is connective tissue. A transcontinental railroad would give one network end-to-end visibility and control. Think the kind of integrated vision Cornelius Vanderbilt dreamed of. In the Gilded Age, railroads shaped economies and connected cities. Today’s equivalent is data integration and seamless execution. We don’t need more steel — we need more reliability. For shippers, that means fewer surprises and a more resilient supply chain. Handled correctly, this potential merger could rebuild a product that earns modal conversion — but only if we align incentives across the ecosystem. Every player must show up. Shortlines need to get in the game by pushing for digital handshakes, carload connectivity, and shared metrics. Intermodal marketing companies can bring data and customers to the table and help shape lane strategies and expectations. Steamship lines port-to-door are your future. Make inland rail performance a C-suite issue. Bulk/merchandise shippers should demand parity: carload deserves the same precision as intermodal. Finally, logistics tech and third-party logistics providers must embed intelligence into the freight fabric, not around it. Handled poorly, this could become another merger that burdens operations and alienates customers. In a world of AI-driven dispatch and predictive ETAs, the window to rewire American freight is closing fast. Connecting teams, systems and expectations matters more than just connecting rail lines. Modernize now or risk handing the next decade of North American freight to faster, more agile competitors. Freight isn’t just a cost center — it’s a competitive edge. We either lead or step aside. That’s why I support a transcontinental rail system. Paul Tonsager has held executive roles at Maersk, CN Rail, CN Worldwide, Coyote (RXO), and Patriot Rail. He can be reached at paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io .

Possible transcontinental rail a chance to ‘rewire’ US freight movements

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Thanks in large part to the current tariff environment, boardrooms are now increasingly focusing on mitigating their exposure to these new taxes and ensuring they’ll have sufficient inventories no matter the disruption.</div>

Thanks in large part to the current tariff environment, boardrooms are now increasingly focusing on mitigating their exposure to these new taxes and ensuring they’ll have sufficient inventories no matter the disruption.

<div class="phx-topic">A recent annual shipping industry event revealed increased attention from the C-suite on tariff and risk mitigation and how far we’ve come in addressing those items, as well as the need for more sophisticated sourcing strategies. At the American Association of Exporters and Importers’ (AAEI’s) annual conference in late June, I witnessed a noticeable shift in terms of a new focus on mitigating trade-related costs and vulnerabilities. This expanded the scope of the Washington, DC event that traditionally centers around compliance, facilitation and influencing policy change. Thanks in large part to the current tariff environment, boardrooms are now increasingly focusing on mitigating their exposure to these new taxes and ensuring they’ll have sufficient inventories no matter the disruption. The first session set the tone, with panel moderator Laura Siegel Rabinowitz of Greenberg Traurig LLP opening with a telling observation: “Companies today are now looking for sourcing strategies involving classification, valuation, and country of origin.” As a trade optimization strategist, I was all smiles. While current tariff rates have certainly put risk planning back into the spotlight, the movement can arguably be traced to the COVID-19 pandemic, when many companies found themselves critically exposed by single-sourcing components. When combined with the unprecedented blockage of the Suez Canal, risk mitigation lights began burning in earnest. But to support the sourcing strategies being raised, companies may need to rethink existing workflows, procedures and tools that would enable trade compliance to work proactively with procurement. The process begins with the corporate buyers/engineering teams sending a list of new products/components to trade compliance for classification. The resulting harmonized system (HS) codes illuminate tariff obligations, identify eligibility for potential Free Trade Agreement (FTA) benefits, and provide visibility to any admissibility requirements that would need to be satisfied as a condition of import. In addition, by involving trade compliance at the earliest stages of new product build/buy decisions, it promotes the potential discovery of tariff engineering opportunities capable of producing surprising savings. <h3>The ‘risk index’ and due diligence </h3>With tariff data in hand, procurement departments can move beyond surface-level quotes based on product cost alone and conduct a more accurate landed cost analysis across pre-qualified suppliers. I’ve personally witnessed examples where purchase orders were awarded to suppliers in China based solely on a lower cost of goods, versus Mexico, which qualified for FTA, had lower transportation costs, and provided shorter door-to-door delivery times. Landed-cost modeling tools allow companies to perform a more accurate “apples-to-apples” comparison by factoring all the costs associated with the door-to-door movement of an international order. They also support dynamic scenario planning by allowing the user to toggle different Incoterms, shipping modes and related transport costs to find the best balance of costs and operational needs. This step also needs to include a key element of strategic sourcing that is often overlooked, and that is understanding a country’s “risk index” — that is, how it scores against a variety of factors, all capable of adding unplanned costs and/or disruption. These include geopolitical stability, crime and corruption, complexity and cost of trade, infrastructure reliability (labor, energy), environmental and social governance (ESG), and natural disasters and climate risk. The final step is due diligence via supplier vetting. Remaining suppliers should be screened through tools that can trace raw materials back to their sources, ensuring compliance with the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and similar controls. This traceability is critical — not just for ethical sourcing, but also for maintaining customs compliance and brand reputation. With this three-step process, corporate procurement departments gain a complete, comprehensive view that balances cost, compliance, risk and continuity with data that can be shared with other stakeholders as part of a broader, collaborative effort. When implemented as corporate policy, it ensures that a purchase order cannot be awarded without completing this analysis. In short, it just simply makes sense. While tariffs might be the current disruptor headline, the broader truth is that supply chain risk lurks in many corners — be it political unrest, environmental disasters, cyberattacks, and even regulatory whiplash. These risks and other potential disruptions have always been part-and-parcel of international trade. However, the current issue is putting trade compliance departments in the boardroom spotlight, providing an opportune time to lobby for those badly needed resources, systems and process changes. Or, as one event panelist who aptly quoted Winston Churchill said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” William G. “Jerry” Peck is a licensed customs broker and trade compliance and optimization specialist with Avalara and can be reached at <a href="mailto:jerry.peck@avalara.com">jerry.peck@avalara.com</a>. </div>

A recent annual shipping industry event revealed increased attention from the C-suite on tariff and risk mitigation and how far we’ve come in addressing those items, as well as the need for more sophisticated sourcing strategies. At the American Association of Exporters and Importers’ (AAEI’s) annual conference in late June, I witnessed a noticeable shift in terms of a new focus on mitigating trade-related costs and vulnerabilities. This expanded the scope of the Washington, DC event that traditionally centers around compliance, facilitation and influencing policy change. Thanks in large part to the current tariff environment, boardrooms are now increasingly focusing on mitigating their exposure to these new taxes and ensuring they’ll have sufficient inventories no matter the disruption. The first session set the tone, with panel moderator Laura Siegel Rabinowitz of Greenberg Traurig LLP opening with a telling observation: “Companies today are now looking for sourcing strategies involving classification, valuation, and country of origin.” As a trade optimization strategist, I was all smiles. While current tariff rates have certainly put risk planning back into the spotlight, the movement can arguably be traced to the COVID-19 pandemic, when many companies found themselves critically exposed by single-sourcing components. When combined with the unprecedented blockage of the Suez Canal, risk mitigation lights began burning in earnest. But to support the sourcing strategies being raised, companies may need to rethink existing workflows, procedures and tools that would enable trade compliance to work proactively with procurement. The process begins with the corporate buyers/engineering teams sending a list of new products/components to trade compliance for classification. The resulting harmonized system (HS) codes illuminate tariff obligations, identify eligibility for potential Free Trade Agreement (FTA) benefits, and provide visibility to any admissibility requirements that would need to be satisfied as a condition of import. In addition, by involving trade compliance at the earliest stages of new product build/buy decisions, it promotes the potential discovery of tariff engineering opportunities capable of producing surprising savings. The ‘risk index’ and due diligence With tariff data in hand, procurement departments can move beyond surface-level quotes based on product cost alone and conduct a more accurate landed cost analysis across pre-qualified suppliers. I’ve personally witnessed examples where purchase orders were awarded to suppliers in China based solely on a lower cost of goods, versus Mexico, which qualified for FTA, had lower transportation costs, and provided shorter door-to-door delivery times. Landed-cost modeling tools allow companies to perform a more accurate “apples-to-apples” comparison by factoring all the costs associated with the door-to-door movement of an international order. They also support dynamic scenario planning by allowing the user to toggle different Incoterms, shipping modes and related transport costs to find the best balance of costs and operational needs. This step also needs to include a key element of strategic sourcing that is often overlooked, and that is understanding a country’s “risk index” — that is, how it scores against a variety of factors, all capable of adding unplanned costs and/or disruption. These include geopolitical stability, crime and corruption, complexity and cost of trade, infrastructure reliability (labor, energy), environmental and social governance (ESG), and natural disasters and climate risk. The final step is due diligence via supplier vetting. Remaining suppliers should be screened through tools that can trace raw materials back to their sources, ensuring compliance with the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and similar controls. This traceability is critical — not just for ethical sourcing, but also for maintaining customs compliance and brand reputation. With this three-step process, corporate procurement departments gain a complete, comprehensive view that balances cost, compliance, risk and continuity with data that can be shared with other stakeholders as part of a broader, collaborative effort. When implemented as corporate policy, it ensures that a purchase order cannot be awarded without completing this analysis. In short, it just simply makes sense. While tariffs might be the current disruptor headline, the broader truth is that supply chain risk lurks in many corners — be it political unrest, environmental disasters, cyberattacks, and even regulatory whiplash. These risks and other potential disruptions have always been part-and-parcel of international trade. However, the current issue is putting trade compliance departments in the boardroom spotlight, providing an opportune time to lobby for those badly needed resources, systems and process changes. Or, as one event panelist who aptly quoted Winston Churchill said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” William G. “Jerry” Peck is a licensed customs broker and trade compliance and optimization specialist with Avalara and can be reached at jerry.peck@avalara.com .

Supply chain

Latest market ‘disruptor’ requires focused procurement approach by C-suites

Manzanillo

{name} {valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')} 
 Y-o-Y: {Manzanillo_YoY_Change.formatNumber('#.0%')}

Lazaro Cardenas

{name} {valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')} 
 Y-o-Y: {Lazaro_Cardenas_YoY_Change.formatNumber('#.0%')}

Veracruz

{name} {valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')} 
 Y-o-Y: {Veracruz_YoY_Change.formatNumber('#.0%')}

Altamira

{name} {valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')} 
 Y-o-Y: {Altamira_YoY_Change.formatNumber('#.0%')}

Ensenada

{name} {valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')} 
 Y-o-Y: {Ensenada_YoY_Change.formatNumber('#.0%')}

Import volumes through major Mexico ports is provided by the Secretariat of Communications and Transport (SCT) includes laden and empty containers. [SCT](https://www.gob.mx/sct)

Import volumes through Mexico ports (SCT)

Top 5 Mexico ports: Manzanillo, Lazaro Cardenas, Veracruz, Altamira, Ensenada imports (year-over-year-change) Gateway

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US shippers have pulled forward as much cargo as they can ahead of the latest deadlines for higher US tariffs, leaving carriers little choice but to cancel more voyages. </div>

US shippers have pulled forward as much cargo as they can ahead of the latest deadlines for higher US tariffs, leaving carriers little choice but to cancel more voyages.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean carriers have begun to reel in capacity ahead of the mid-August expiry of the 90-day pause on higher US tariffs on Chinese goods, with an increasing number of trans-Pacific container services getting blanked for the rest of July. And with most pre-higher tariff imports on the water or ready to ship, spot rates look set for further weakness through the end of summer. Some 175,000 TEUs of container capacity is set to be blanked during July, according to data from maritime intelligence provider eeSea, amounting to 11% of deployed capacity between Asia and the US West Coast. That is an uptick from the 118,500 TEUs of capacity blanked in June, which accounted for about 9% of deployed capacity. The canceled departures from Asia coincide with <a href="https://www.tradecomplianceresourcehub.com/2025/07/17/trump-2-0-tariff-tracker/">the Aug. 12 deadline for the Trump administration to impose country-specific tariffs on China</a> in the absence of a new trade deal. With an Aug. 1 deadline for trade talks with other Asian countries, demand was already drying up, with Chinese goods the last that could get on a ship and enter the US in time to avoid the higher rates. “It’s already too late to ship product from Vietnam and Southeast Asia to beat the Aug. 1 deadline,” an ocean carrier source told the Journal of Commerce. “There has been no spike in imports from Vietnam since June, when it was possible to beat the Aug. 1 deadline, so demand simply isn’t there.” Indeed, many of the services culled through July also call southern Chinese ports that serve as transshipment points for other Asian goods, or services that directly call Southeast Asia. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="1c1d9578-c129-4d4e-a136-e220473bd136"></dynamic-object></div>OOCL canceled eastbound sailings on its Pacific South China Express (PSX) service for the last two weeks of July, according to Hong Kong-based logistics provider Honour Lane Shipping. The PSX service will offer an eastbound ad hoc call to Shanghai, though, during the last week of July, with only one call at the southern port of Yantian. Express services are typically the first to get blanked, with CU Lines, SeaLead and other niche carriers also canceling services through July. But the demand slowdown is also hitting big-ship services as well. CMA CGM canceled an eastbound voyage on its Columbus Jax service, which offers average weekly capacity of about 13,000 TEUs, for the last week of July. The pendulum service, which switches to US East Coast ports on its westbound voyages, also calls Malaysia’s Port Klang, Thailand’s Laem Chabang and Vietnam’s Cai Mep.Cosco Shipping canceled a July voyage on its 13,000-TEU Asia-US West Coast service, while the Premier Alliance has also canceled two July voyages on its 13,000-TEU MP2 service. <h3>Weaker second half expected</h3>While a trade deal with China or other Asian countries may be in the offing, forwarders and shippers are not hopeful that it would spark more demand. US importers have mostly frontloaded goods already and will just be dribbling in product as needed through the rest of the year, Sanjay Tejwani, chief executive of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “A lot of frontloading has happened, which means that the volumes will remain soft,” Tejwani said. “August through December will be soft. Even if the tariffs were to drop back to zero, a lot of merchandise has been shipped and inventory levels are decent, why would anyone bring in more cargo?”Ocean carriers are quoting spot rates near $2,500 per standard container to the US West Coast as of July 15, hoping the step-up in blank sailings for July would tighten the market, Robert Khachatryan, chief executive of Freight Right Global Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. But he doesn’t expect the rate level to hold, adding that he is seeing a number of voyage-specific West Coast rates near $1,700. The mid-July rates “were driven largely by a reduction in capacity,” Khachatryan said. “There is no pickup in demand.” Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, pegged Asia-USWC rates at $1,733 per FEU as of July 16, down 2% on the week. But Drewry’s Shanghai-Los Angeles rate as of July 17 was $2,817 per FEU.Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com ">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report.</div>

Ocean carriers have begun to reel in capacity ahead of the mid-August expiry of the 90-day pause on higher US tariffs on Chinese goods, with an increasing number of trans-Pacific container services getting blanked for the rest of July. And with most pre-higher tariff imports on the water or ready to ship, spot rates look set for further weakness through the end of summer. Some 175,000 TEUs of container capacity is set to be blanked during July, according to data from maritime intelligence provider eeSea, amounting to 11% of deployed capacity between Asia and the US West Coast. That is an uptick from the 118,500 TEUs of capacity blanked in June, which accounted for about 9% of deployed capacity. The canceled departures from Asia coincide with the Aug. 12 deadline for the Trump administration to impose country-specific tariffs on China in the absence of a new trade deal. With an Aug. 1 deadline for trade talks with other Asian countries, demand was already drying up, with Chinese goods the last that could get on a ship and enter the US in time to avoid the higher rates. “It’s already too late to ship product from Vietnam and Southeast Asia to beat the Aug. 1 deadline,” an ocean carrier source told the Journal of Commerce. “There has been no spike in imports from Vietnam since June, when it was possible to beat the Aug. 1 deadline, so demand simply isn’t there.” Indeed, many of the services culled through July also call southern Chinese ports that serve as transshipment points for other Asian goods, or services that directly call Southeast Asia. OOCL canceled eastbound sailings on its Pacific South China Express (PSX) service for the last two weeks of July, according to Hong Kong-based logistics provider Honour Lane Shipping. The PSX service will offer an eastbound ad hoc call to Shanghai, though, during the last week of July, with only one call at the southern port of Yantian. Express services are typically the first to get blanked, with CU Lines, SeaLead and other niche carriers also canceling services through July. But the demand slowdown is also hitting big-ship services as well. CMA CGM canceled an eastbound voyage on its Columbus Jax service, which offers average weekly capacity of about 13,000 TEUs, for the last week of July. The pendulum service, which switches to US East Coast ports on its westbound voyages, also calls Malaysia’s Port Klang, Thailand’s Laem Chabang and Vietnam’s Cai Mep. Cosco Shipping canceled a July voyage on its 13,000-TEU Asia-US West Coast service, while the Premier Alliance has also canceled two July voyages on its 13,000-TEU MP2 service. Weaker second half expected While a trade deal with China or other Asian countries may be in the offing, forwarders and shippers are not hopeful that it would spark more demand. US importers have mostly frontloaded goods already and will just be dribbling in product as needed through the rest of the year, Sanjay Tejwani, chief executive of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “A lot of frontloading has happened, which means that the volumes will remain soft,” Tejwani said. “August through December will be soft. Even if the tariffs were to drop back to zero, a lot of merchandise has been shipped and inventory levels are decent, why would anyone bring in more cargo?” Ocean carriers are quoting spot rates near $2,500 per standard container to the US West Coast as of July 15, hoping the step-up in blank sailings for July would tighten the market, Robert Khachatryan, chief executive of Freight Right Global Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. But he doesn’t expect the rate level to hold, adding that he is seeing a number of voyage-specific West Coast rates near $1,700. The mid-July rates “were driven largely by a reduction in capacity,” Khachatryan said. “There is no pickup in demand.” Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, pegged Asia-USWC rates at $1,733 per FEU as of July 16, down 2% on the week. But Drewry’s Shanghai-Los Angeles rate as of July 17 was $2,817 per FEU. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report.

Looming August tariff deadline prompts carriers to pull trans-Pacific capacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The agreement clears the way for BNSF to move cargo from Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland to Salt Lake City for ocean carriers CMA CGM and Mediterranean Shipping Co.</div>

The agreement clears the way for BNSF to move cargo from Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland to Salt Lake City for ocean carriers CMA CGM and Mediterranean Shipping Co.

<div class="phx-topic">BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (UP) have reached an agreement ending a dispute that delayed the launch of international intermodal train service between ports in California and Salt Lake City. The two railroads <a href="https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1752685668843/52671.pdf">notified the US Surface Transportation Board (STB)</a> of the deal ahead of a briefing that had been scheduled for next week to discuss details of the dispute with regulators. The meeting between the railroads and the STB has been canceled in light of the deal. The agreement clears the way for BNSF to move cargo from Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bnsf-up-dispute-threatens-oakland-slc-service-triggers-stb-petition-6040399">Salt Lake City</a> for ocean carriers CMA CGM and Mediterranean Shipping Co. As part of the deal, BNSF agreed to use a southern route through Donner Pass, coming to an undisclosed financial agreement on compensation it will provide to UP. BNSF originally balked at the idea of the southern route crossing between Lake Tahoe and Reno because it said UP could charge for upgrades it made to the Donner Pass tunnel in 2009, which BNSF said would amount to tens of millions of dollars. UP owns the tracks and dispatching, but BNSF has trackage rights and provides the locomotives and railcars to operate the service. Originally, BNSF wanted to route trains to Keddie, California, then east to Salt Lake City via a northern route that would allow the company to avoid paying the fees to use the southern route through Donner Pass. BNSF argued that UP’s reluctance to agree on the northern route was rooted in a desire to recoup funds for the Donner Pass upgrades and out of retribution because MSC and CMA CGM were former UP customers that switched to BNSF last year. UP said the Salt Lake City service could not begin last week as planned because BNSF did not provide adequate notice to UP management, so it required more time on UP’s part to hire the crews and build work schedules to accommodate BNSF. BNSF is hopeful the new route will result in volume growth. On average, about 25,000 containers per year move from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to Salt Lake City and about 15,000 annually from the Port of Oakland to Salt Lake City, according to Journal of Commerce estimates of data filed with the STB. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (UP) have reached an agreement ending a dispute that delayed the launch of international intermodal train service between ports in California and Salt Lake City. The two railroads notified the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) of the deal ahead of a briefing that had been scheduled for next week to discuss details of the dispute with regulators. The meeting between the railroads and the STB has been canceled in light of the deal. The agreement clears the way for BNSF to move cargo from Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland to Salt Lake City for ocean carriers CMA CGM and Mediterranean Shipping Co. As part of the deal, BNSF agreed to use a southern route through Donner Pass, coming to an undisclosed financial agreement on compensation it will provide to UP. BNSF originally balked at the idea of the southern route crossing between Lake Tahoe and Reno because it said UP could charge for upgrades it made to the Donner Pass tunnel in 2009, which BNSF said would amount to tens of millions of dollars. UP owns the tracks and dispatching, but BNSF has trackage rights and provides the locomotives and railcars to operate the service. Originally, BNSF wanted to route trains to Keddie, California, then east to Salt Lake City via a northern route that would allow the company to avoid paying the fees to use the southern route through Donner Pass. BNSF argued that UP’s reluctance to agree on the northern route was rooted in a desire to recoup funds for the Donner Pass upgrades and out of retribution because MSC and CMA CGM were former UP customers that switched to BNSF last year. UP said the Salt Lake City service could not begin last week as planned because BNSF did not provide adequate notice to UP management, so it required more time on UP’s part to hire the crews and build work schedules to accommodate BNSF. BNSF is hopeful the new route will result in volume growth. On average, about 25,000 containers per year move from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to Salt Lake City and about 15,000 annually from the Port of Oakland to Salt Lake City, according to Journal of Commerce estimates of data filed with the STB. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

BNSF to use ‘southern’ route to Salt Lake City under UP intermodal deal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Some customers and competitors were surprised by the timing of the surcharges, which are typically implemented in August or September, if at all, and only after volume spikes.</div>

Some customers and competitors were surprised by the timing of the surcharges, which are typically implemented in August or September, if at all, and only after volume spikes.

<div class="phx-topic">J.B. Hunt Transport Services is defending its decision to impose surcharges of up to $1,500 per container on some shippers moving goods from Southern California, saying the fees are necessary to maintain service levels during an unpredictable peak season. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/jb-hunt-hits-some-shippers-with-big-surcharges-in-southern-california-6043454">The surcharges</a>, which apply to certain retail, appliance and electronics shippers, are intended to ensure J.B. Hunt has the equipment and personnel in place if demand increases ahead of the holiday season, the company said during its quarterly earnings call late Tuesday. The surcharges are a tool, in a way, for J.B. Hunt to regulate how much unplanned freight it accepts during the busiest weeks of the year, ensuring there are enough drivers and containers to haul shipments for all its customers in Southern California. The surcharges went into effect July 13. “The last thing our industry can do is fail this shipping community at a time when the demand upticks,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on the earnings call. “We have a handful of customers that said, ‘Hey, I might have extra business in July.’ We had many customers say, ‘I’m going to have the same peak I had last year’ ... and we just wanted a plan so we’re not caught by surprise.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="69b9e75c-ee79-4b00-9c29-ef0bc47d2af2"></dynamic-object></div>Meanwhile, maintaining strong service is important as J.B. Hunt and rail partner BNSF Railway performed above average in the second quarter, according to indicators. BNSF’s average Z-score, a proprietary Journal of Commerce calculation factoring train speeds, trains being held and idle laden railcars, has been positive for 13 consecutive weeks based on data filed with the US Surface Transportation Board (STB). Positive Z-scores indicate the railroad is outperforming its own history, while negative scores indicate underperformance. J.B. Hunt was also named the best intermodal provider by 41.5% of shippers in the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Service Scorecard, the highest percentage among its peers. The survey of more than 240 shippers was conducted between May 1 and June 30. The company regularly topped <a href="https://www.joc.com/resources/special-reports/domestic-intermodal-service-scorecard">prior surveys</a> as well, including in categories such as equipment availability, on-time pickups and on-time deliveries. Executing service becomes harder when week-over-week volumes become volatile. “This added complexity, lack of accurate forecast and potential for volatility, is why our peak season surcharge programs are starting earlier this year,” Spencer Frazier, executive vice president of sales for J.B. Hunt, said on the call. “Regardless of customer strategy and the shape of peak season, we will be ready to meet their demand when it occurs.” <h3>Some customers will look to skirt the charges </h3>Some J.B. Hunt customers and competitors were surprised by the timing of the surcharges. Peak season surcharges (PSSs) are typically implemented in August or September, if at all, and only after volume spikes. BNSF hauled more than 18,000 ocean containers during the week ending July 13, the highest since late January, according to data platform RailState. However, the railroad only hauled about 12,000 domestic containers during the same week, on par with its rolling 26-week average covering the first half of the year. J.B. Hunt implemented the surcharges after discussions with shippers over the last three weeks, customers told the Journal of Commerce. The fees apply only when a shipper out of Southern California exceeds its weekly contracted allotment, but the added costs can be substantial. “At $1,500 extra, our [competing] truckload rates become far cheaper,” said one J.B. Hunt customer who did not want to be identified. “That’s the trifecta of bad: higher rates, slower transit, and increased risk of theft.” Customers have also questioned whether J.B. Hunt incurs $1,500 in costs to reposition equipment to Southern California, or whether the surcharge reflects an attempt by J.B. Hunt to compensate for what it could not obtain during earlier contract negotiations. A second J.B. Hunt customer said they would take steps to avoid the fees. “We will look for opportunities not to pay the $1,500. That’s the short answer,” the source said. “We feel really confident that we’ll be successful.” Shippers said there are multiple ways to sidestep the charges, especially when only a few containers exceed weekly contractual limits. Some may shift overflow freight to J.B. Hunt’s competitors, both asset-based and non-asset-based intermodal providers. Others may opt for truckload carriers on the spot market, particularly as trucking rates remain low. Still others may delay non-urgent cargo by a few days, taking advantage of the weekly reset on allotments. It is not yet clear whether J.B. Hunt’s rivals will follow suit on the surcharges. While most major intermodal providers imposed PSSs last year, none set rates above $1,000 per container, except J.B. Hunt. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

J.B. Hunt Transport Services is defending its decision to impose surcharges of up to $1,500 per container on some shippers moving goods from Southern California, saying the fees are necessary to maintain service levels during an unpredictable peak season. The surcharges , which apply to certain retail, appliance and electronics shippers, are intended to ensure J.B. Hunt has the equipment and personnel in place if demand increases ahead of the holiday season, the company said during its quarterly earnings call late Tuesday. The surcharges are a tool, in a way, for J.B. Hunt to regulate how much unplanned freight it accepts during the busiest weeks of the year, ensuring there are enough drivers and containers to haul shipments for all its customers in Southern California. The surcharges went into effect July 13. “The last thing our industry can do is fail this shipping community at a time when the demand upticks,” Darren Field, president of J.B. Hunt’s intermodal division, said on the earnings call. “We have a handful of customers that said, ‘Hey, I might have extra business in July.’ We had many customers say, ‘I’m going to have the same peak I had last year’ ... and we just wanted a plan so we’re not caught by surprise.” Meanwhile, maintaining strong service is important as J.B. Hunt and rail partner BNSF Railway performed above average in the second quarter, according to indicators. BNSF’s average Z-score, a proprietary Journal of Commerce calculation factoring train speeds, trains being held and idle laden railcars, has been positive for 13 consecutive weeks based on data filed with the US Surface Transportation Board (STB). Positive Z-scores indicate the railroad is outperforming its own history, while negative scores indicate underperformance. J.B. Hunt was also named the best intermodal provider by 41.5% of shippers in the latest Journal of Commerce Intermodal Service Scorecard, the highest percentage among its peers. The survey of more than 240 shippers was conducted between May 1 and June 30. The company regularly topped prior surveys as well, including in categories such as equipment availability, on-time pickups and on-time deliveries. Executing service becomes harder when week-over-week volumes become volatile. “This added complexity, lack of accurate forecast and potential for volatility, is why our peak season surcharge programs are starting earlier this year,” Spencer Frazier, executive vice president of sales for J.B. Hunt, said on the call. “Regardless of customer strategy and the shape of peak season, we will be ready to meet their demand when it occurs.” Some customers will look to skirt the charges Some J.B. Hunt customers and competitors were surprised by the timing of the surcharges. Peak season surcharges (PSSs) are typically implemented in August or September, if at all, and only after volume spikes. BNSF hauled more than 18,000 ocean containers during the week ending July 13, the highest since late January, according to data platform RailState. However, the railroad only hauled about 12,000 domestic containers during the same week, on par with its rolling 26-week average covering the first half of the year. J.B. Hunt implemented the surcharges after discussions with shippers over the last three weeks, customers told the Journal of Commerce. The fees apply only when a shipper out of Southern California exceeds its weekly contracted allotment, but the added costs can be substantial. “At $1,500 extra, our [competing] truckload rates become far cheaper,” said one J.B. Hunt customer who did not want to be identified. “That’s the trifecta of bad: higher rates, slower transit, and increased risk of theft.” Customers have also questioned whether J.B. Hunt incurs $1,500 in costs to reposition equipment to Southern California, or whether the surcharge reflects an attempt by J.B. Hunt to compensate for what it could not obtain during earlier contract negotiations. A second J.B. Hunt customer said they would take steps to avoid the fees. “We will look for opportunities not to pay the $1,500. That’s the short answer,” the source said. “We feel really confident that we’ll be successful.” Shippers said there are multiple ways to sidestep the charges, especially when only a few containers exceed weekly contractual limits. Some may shift overflow freight to J.B. Hunt’s competitors, both asset-based and non-asset-based intermodal providers. Others may opt for truckload carriers on the spot market, particularly as trucking rates remain low. Still others may delay non-urgent cargo by a few days, taking advantage of the weekly reset on allotments. It is not yet clear whether J.B. Hunt’s rivals will follow suit on the surcharges. While most major intermodal providers imposed PSSs last year, none set rates above $1,000 per container, except J.B. Hunt. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

J.B. Hunt says surcharges necessary to maintain peak season service

Use code TPM25GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION AND TPM26

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Use code TPMGW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

UPGRADE TO GOLD FOR JUST $595

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

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code STS20 at checkout to save 20% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

SAVE ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code TPM25GW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE: Use code STSW20 to save 20% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code TPMGW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The largest US less-than-truckload provider says it won’t enforce new density-based classifications until Dec. 1, giving shippers more time to adapt to changes. </div>

The largest US less-than-truckload provider says it won’t enforce new density-based classifications until Dec. 1, giving shippers more time to adapt to changes.

<div class="phx-topic">FedEx Freight, the largest US less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier, is delaying by 150 days the implementation of changes to the shipment classification system used to set LTL pricing. The revisions to the National Motor Freight Classification (NMFC), which took effect Saturday, affect thousands of products, moving them to density-based classes. “To ensure ample time to fully adapt processes and pricing to the new classifications, FedEx Freight is delaying enforcement until Dec. 1,” the company said <a href="https://www.fedex.com/en-us/shipping/freight/class-calculator.html#nmfc">on its website</a>. No other LTL carriers have followed suit yet, but FedEx Freight is a large enough provider that the 150-day reprieve will impact thousands of US shippers. FedEx Freight has nearly 15% of the total US LTL market in terms of daily shipments, hauling about 98,900 shipments a day in 2024, according to SJ Consulting Group data. The trucking arm of FedEx had about $9.1 billion in revenue in calendar year 2024. The next largest LTL carrier, Old Dominion Freight Line, had $5.8 billion in revenue. <h3>Greater weight on density </h3>Shippers have been wrestling for much of the past year with <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-shippers-urged-to-prepare-now-for-upcoming-ltl-class-changes-rate-resetting-5933927">how to adjust and prepare for changes</a> that move more than 2,000 NMFC items into full-scale density classes. The National Motor Freight Traffic Association (NMFTA), which administers the NMFC, and LTL carriers have urged shippers to review how they build palletized shipments. With the revisions now in place, the question turns from whether shippers are ready to adapt to whether trucking companies are willing to implement them in a weak LTL market. Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL) and XPO saw shipment volumes drop in May, with ODFL’s daily volume falling 6.8% year over year that month and XPO’s shipments slipping 5%, according to company reports. FedEx Freight’s shipment count fell 1% year over year in the quarter ending May 31. LTL pricing has remained resilient, however, with the US long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI) up 7.8% year over year in June at a reading of 261, its highest to date this year, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="2b531ac2-bb4f-4809-9a8a-81ad615a8698"></dynamic-object></div>Classification is a tool used to help determine pricing based on shipment characteristics by commodity including density, handling, stowability and liability. Density-based pricing considers the mass (pounds) and volume (cubic feet) of the load rather than other characteristics. The July 19 changes are only the beginning as the NMFTA continues to review nearly 20,000 commodity codes for additional changes in the future. <h3>Pricing impact </h3>Although there’s no set formula to show how much LTL rates might increase under the NMFC revisions, shippers have said they believe rates will rise — especially if they do nothing. With more products shifting to density-only classifications, shippers that move low-density items such as cabinets, chairs and foam that take up lots of trailer space may pay more. High density items such as ceramic tile, concrete bricks, or steel fasteners are likely to cost less to ship because they take up less space in the truck. The goal is to maximize the use of space inside the trailer with as many shipments from as many customers as possible, increasing daily productivity and reducing costs. The key to avoiding rate increases, experts say, is for shippers to provide exact weight and dimension data for palletized shipments on bills of lading. Inaccurate data or a lack of information could lead to repricing of freight or additional charges. FedEx Freight said after Dec. 1 it may apply an inspection surcharge for shipments with incomplete or inaccurate information listed on the bill of lading. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. Senior Editor Ari Ashe contributed to this report. </div>

FedEx Freight, the largest US less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier, is delaying by 150 days the implementation of changes to the shipment classification system used to set LTL pricing. The revisions to the National Motor Freight Classification (NMFC), which took effect Saturday, affect thousands of products, moving them to density-based classes. “To ensure ample time to fully adapt processes and pricing to the new classifications, FedEx Freight is delaying enforcement until Dec. 1,” the company said on its website . No other LTL carriers have followed suit yet, but FedEx Freight is a large enough provider that the 150-day reprieve will impact thousands of US shippers. FedEx Freight has nearly 15% of the total US LTL market in terms of daily shipments, hauling about 98,900 shipments a day in 2024, according to SJ Consulting Group data. The trucking arm of FedEx had about $9.1 billion in revenue in calendar year 2024. The next largest LTL carrier, Old Dominion Freight Line, had $5.8 billion in revenue. Greater weight on density Shippers have been wrestling for much of the past year with how to adjust and prepare for changes that move more than 2,000 NMFC items into full-scale density classes. The National Motor Freight Traffic Association (NMFTA), which administers the NMFC, and LTL carriers have urged shippers to review how they build palletized shipments. With the revisions now in place, the question turns from whether shippers are ready to adapt to whether trucking companies are willing to implement them in a weak LTL market. Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL) and XPO saw shipment volumes drop in May, with ODFL’s daily volume falling 6.8% year over year that month and XPO’s shipments slipping 5%, according to company reports. FedEx Freight’s shipment count fell 1% year over year in the quarter ending May 31. LTL pricing has remained resilient, however, with the US long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI) up 7.8% year over year in June at a reading of 261, its highest to date this year, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Classification is a tool used to help determine pricing based on shipment characteristics by commodity including density, handling, stowability and liability. Density-based pricing considers the mass (pounds) and volume (cubic feet) of the load rather than other characteristics. The July 19 changes are only the beginning as the NMFTA continues to review nearly 20,000 commodity codes for additional changes in the future. Pricing impact Although there’s no set formula to show how much LTL rates might increase under the NMFC revisions, shippers have said they believe rates will rise — especially if they do nothing. With more products shifting to density-only classifications, shippers that move low-density items such as cabinets, chairs and foam that take up lots of trailer space may pay more. High density items such as ceramic tile, concrete bricks, or steel fasteners are likely to cost less to ship because they take up less space in the truck. The goal is to maximize the use of space inside the trailer with as many shipments from as many customers as possible, increasing daily productivity and reducing costs. The key to avoiding rate increases, experts say, is for shippers to provide exact weight and dimension data for palletized shipments on bills of lading. Inaccurate data or a lack of information could lead to repricing of freight or additional charges. FedEx Freight said after Dec. 1 it may apply an inspection surcharge for shipments with incomplete or inaccurate information listed on the bill of lading. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Ari Ashe contributed to this report.

Trucking News

FedEx Freight delays enforcement of LTL re-classification

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But other Class I railroads will likely be vocal in their opposition to any deal and look to rally support from shippers to block the move, setting the stage for a contentious regulatory battle. </div>

But other Class I railroads will likely be vocal in their opposition to any deal and look to rally support from shippers to block the move, setting the stage for a contentious regulatory battle.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific (UP) is in preliminary discussions to acquire Norfolk Southern (NS), according to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/business/deals/railroad-operator-union-pacific-exploring-deal-for-norfolk-southern-1d06e822?mod=Searchresults_pos2&amp;page=1">The Wall Street Journal</a>, in what could become the largest freight rail merger in American history. If a deal happens, it would create the first coast-to-coast US rail network and mark a dramatic shift in the structure of US freight railroads. The transaction, which would create a mega-railroad valued at $200 billion, would far exceed the $31 billion merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-regulators-approve-cp-kcs-merger-to-form-first-us-canada-mexico-rail-5192986">completed in 2023</a>. However, UP and NS bring different freight portfolios to the table, and any proposed deal is expected to draw intense scrutiny from regulators. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6046006_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Other Class I railroads BNSF Railway, CSX Transportation and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) will likely be vocal in their opposition to any deal and look to rally support from shippers to block the move, setting the stage for a contentious regulatory battle. UP and NS share a common commitment to the principles of precision scheduled railroading (PSR), an operations philosophy that emphasizes efficiency, asset utilization and cost control. But some in the analyst community have speculated that CSX could be a potential target of UP. UP might also see more upside acquiring NS, which has underperformed CSX for several years financially and operationally. But from a freight mix perspective, UP more closely resembles CSX. Since 2018, non-intermodal cargo has accounted for 53.8% of CSX’s volume, nearly identical to Union Pacific’s 55%, according to the Association of American Railroads (AAR). Non-intermodal accounts for just 43.4% of Norfolk Southern volume, with the majority being containerized freight. UP CEO Jim Vena has been critical of intermodal at times because it doesn’t generate the high margins of commodities such as agricultural products, petrochemicals, plastics and construction materials. “In the intermodal piece, I don’t know. I like the industrial and the bulk business,” Vena said last month at the Wells Fargo Industrials &amp; Materials Conference. “I think the railroads have made some real strategically impactful decisions on how they handle intermodal that are not helpful.” After a brief interjection from his chief financial officer, Vena added, “I didn’t say I didn’t love [intermodal customers].” UP’s CEO is a protégé of the late E. Hunter Harrison, the creator of precision scheduled railroading. PSR practitioners measure operating ratios — i.e. the percentage of revenue that is absorbed by expenses. Lower operating ratios mean more revenue flows to the bottom line, driving profits. “We have long believed that the larger carload footprint, better chemicals, autos, and export ag connectivity makes CSX a better target from a freight flow perspective,” David Vernon, an industry analyst with investment bank Bernstein Societe Generale, wrote in a note published Friday. “While the potential synergy value of a UP and CSX combination is slightly greater, it’s not that much greater.” <h3>Intermodal implications would be profound </h3>If it were approved, a transcontinental US freight railroad would cause a significant reshuffling of the domestic and international intermodal markets. Ocean carriers, for example, often sign long-term contracts for inland rail services. If a carrier currently uses BNSF on the West Coast and Norfolk Southern on the East Coast for international business, the fate of those contracts in a post-merger landscape would be uncertain. The implications for domestic intermodal would be even messier. Hub Group, Swift Intermodal and parcel giant UPS are already customers of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern, but Schneider National and STG Logistics are locked into multi-year deals with CSX in the eastern US. The shakeup could be substantial for non-asset brokers, also known as intermodal marketing companies (IMCs). Union Pacific controls the EMP and UMAX 53-foot container pools, which are shared with CSX, NS, and Canadian National. A UP-NS merger could limit or eliminate CSX’s access to those pools, potentially impacting significant volumes of freight. “While intermodal channel partners would need to adapt, single line trans-con service would likely be more competitive to the highway and accelerate share shifts,” Bernstein’s Vernon noted. The largest unknown would involve J.B. Hunt Transport Services, the largest US intermodal provider. J.B. Hunt exclusively partners with BNSF in the West and relies heavily on NS in the East, although it does put a portion of business on CSX. J.B. Hunt is unlikely to sever ties with BNSF because their relationship spans nearly four decades and includes joint Quantum service offerings in the US and Mexico. J.B. Hunt has also been critical of the PSR model employed by UP and CPKC. While J.B. Hunt could shift its East Coast operations to CSX, a combined Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern could wield unprecedented pricing power, potentially creating the first company with enough leverage to compete with J.B. Hunt on pricing negotiations with shippers. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Union Pacific (UP) is in preliminary discussions to acquire Norfolk Southern (NS), according to The Wall Street Journal , in what could become the largest freight rail merger in American history. If a deal happens, it would create the first coast-to-coast US rail network and mark a dramatic shift in the structure of US freight railroads. The transaction, which would create a mega-railroad valued at $200 billion, would far exceed the $31 billion merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern completed in 2023 . However, UP and NS bring different freight portfolios to the table, and any proposed deal is expected to draw intense scrutiny from regulators. Other Class I railroads BNSF Railway, CSX Transportation and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) will likely be vocal in their opposition to any deal and look to rally support from shippers to block the move, setting the stage for a contentious regulatory battle. UP and NS share a common commitment to the principles of precision scheduled railroading (PSR), an operations philosophy that emphasizes efficiency, asset utilization and cost control. But some in the analyst community have speculated that CSX could be a potential target of UP. UP might also see more upside acquiring NS, which has underperformed CSX for several years financially and operationally. But from a freight mix perspective, UP more closely resembles CSX. Since 2018, non-intermodal cargo has accounted for 53.8% of CSX’s volume, nearly identical to Union Pacific’s 55%, according to the Association of American Railroads (AAR). Non-intermodal accounts for just 43.4% of Norfolk Southern volume, with the majority being containerized freight. UP CEO Jim Vena has been critical of intermodal at times because it doesn’t generate the high margins of commodities such as agricultural products, petrochemicals, plastics and construction materials. “In the intermodal piece, I don’t know. I like the industrial and the bulk business,” Vena said last month at the Wells Fargo Industrials & Materials Conference. “I think the railroads have made some real strategically impactful decisions on how they handle intermodal that are not helpful.” After a brief interjection from his chief financial officer, Vena added, “I didn’t say I didn’t love [intermodal customers].” UP’s CEO is a protégé of the late E. Hunter Harrison, the creator of precision scheduled railroading. PSR practitioners measure operating ratios — i.e. the percentage of revenue that is absorbed by expenses. Lower operating ratios mean more revenue flows to the bottom line, driving profits. “We have long believed that the larger carload footprint, better chemicals, autos, and export ag connectivity makes CSX a better target from a freight flow perspective,” David Vernon, an industry analyst with investment bank Bernstein Societe Generale, wrote in a note published Friday. “While the potential synergy value of a UP and CSX combination is slightly greater, it’s not that much greater.” Intermodal implications would be profound If it were approved, a transcontinental US freight railroad would cause a significant reshuffling of the domestic and international intermodal markets. Ocean carriers, for example, often sign long-term contracts for inland rail services. If a carrier currently uses BNSF on the West Coast and Norfolk Southern on the East Coast for international business, the fate of those contracts in a post-merger landscape would be uncertain. The implications for domestic intermodal would be even messier. Hub Group, Swift Intermodal and parcel giant UPS are already customers of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern, but Schneider National and STG Logistics are locked into multi-year deals with CSX in the eastern US. The shakeup could be substantial for non-asset brokers, also known as intermodal marketing companies (IMCs). Union Pacific controls the EMP and UMAX 53-foot container pools, which are shared with CSX, NS, and Canadian National. A UP-NS merger could limit or eliminate CSX’s access to those pools, potentially impacting significant volumes of freight. “While intermodal channel partners would need to adapt, single line trans-con service would likely be more competitive to the highway and accelerate share shifts,” Bernstein’s Vernon noted. The largest unknown would involve J.B. Hunt Transport Services, the largest US intermodal provider. J.B. Hunt exclusively partners with BNSF in the West and relies heavily on NS in the East, although it does put a portion of business on CSX. J.B. Hunt is unlikely to sever ties with BNSF because their relationship spans nearly four decades and includes joint Quantum service offerings in the US and Mexico. J.B. Hunt has also been critical of the PSR model employed by UP and CPKC. While J.B. Hunt could shift its East Coast operations to CSX, a combined Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern could wield unprecedented pricing power, potentially creating the first company with enough leverage to compete with J.B. Hunt on pricing negotiations with shippers. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Potential UP-NS tie-up would cause major shift in US intermodal market

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The decision cuts against what Schneider announced when it acquired Cowan last November, that Cowan’s brand would be retained and the company would operate as a wholly owned subsidiary.</div>

The decision cuts against what Schneider announced when it acquired Cowan last November, that Cowan’s brand would be retained and the company would operate as a wholly owned subsidiary.

<div class="phx-topic">Schneider National is dissolving the brokerage division of Cowan Systems, a company it <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/schneider-bolsters-us-east-coast-business-by-acquiring-cowan-systems-5824223">acquired for $390 million last November</a> to expand its dedicated truckload division. Employees of Cowan Logistics, the acquired company’s brokerage unit, were informed on Tuesday at an internal meeting that Cowan would be rebranded from Oct. 1. The decision cuts against what Schneider announced at the time of the acquisition, when it indicated that Cowan’s brand would be retained and that the company would operate as a wholly owned subsidiary. “As part of our ongoing efforts to strengthen and streamline our brokerage operations, Cowan Logistics will be fully integrated into Schneider Brokerage effective Oct. 1, 2025,” a spokesperson for Wisconsin-based Schneider told the Journal of Commerce. The spokesperson said the move allows Schneider to “unify our capabilities under a single brand, expand our service offerings, and better support our customers and carrier partners.” The change is specific to the brokerage division and will not affect Cowan Systems’ trucking operations, which will continue to operate independently. A company email to employees explaining the consolidation that was viewed by the Journal of Commerce said, “it became clear there were numerous opportunities to the business and [employees] to expedite growth by combining both groups and rebranding Cowan Logistics to Schneider Brokerage.” <h3>Fate of employees unclear </h3>The absorption of Cowan’s brokerage division into Schneider’s comes amid a prolonged period of intense competition among brokers as they vie for truckload freight in a market constrained by muted demand. It’s not immediately clear how many of Cowan’s brokerage employees Schneider plans to retain. A Cowan source who did not want to be identified told the Journal of Commerce Schneider “is basically retaining key employees, trucks [and] key accounts of Cowan’s.” The source said Schneider’s intent is to eliminate redundancies within its own brokerage division, and that its employees were instructed to push off discussions with customers about the dissolution of the Cowan Logistics brand until closer to October. At the time of the acquisition, the 100-year-old, Baltimore-based Cowan provided logistics, trucking, shipping and warehousing services, with a fleet of more than 1,800 trucks and about 7,500 trailers. Schneider will take over Cowan’s motor carrier (MC) number and standard carrier alpha code (SCAC), along with any of Cowan’s retained employees, clients and contracts. Until the rebranding is complete, Cowan’s leadership will largely remain in place but will report to Ben Schuchart, senior vice president of Schneider Transportation Management, and Jim Nicholson, vice president of brokerage operations for Schneider, according to the company email. Schneider is due to release its second-quarter earnings July 31. Contact Clarissa Hawes at <a href="mailto:clarissahawes@gmail.com">clarissahawes@gmail.com</a>. </div>

Schneider National is dissolving the brokerage division of Cowan Systems, a company it acquired for $390 million last November to expand its dedicated truckload division. Employees of Cowan Logistics, the acquired company’s brokerage unit, were informed on Tuesday at an internal meeting that Cowan would be rebranded from Oct. 1. The decision cuts against what Schneider announced at the time of the acquisition, when it indicated that Cowan’s brand would be retained and that the company would operate as a wholly owned subsidiary. “As part of our ongoing efforts to strengthen and streamline our brokerage operations, Cowan Logistics will be fully integrated into Schneider Brokerage effective Oct. 1, 2025,” a spokesperson for Wisconsin-based Schneider told the Journal of Commerce. The spokesperson said the move allows Schneider to “unify our capabilities under a single brand, expand our service offerings, and better support our customers and carrier partners.” The change is specific to the brokerage division and will not affect Cowan Systems’ trucking operations, which will continue to operate independently. A company email to employees explaining the consolidation that was viewed by the Journal of Commerce said, “it became clear there were numerous opportunities to the business and [employees] to expedite growth by combining both groups and rebranding Cowan Logistics to Schneider Brokerage.” Fate of employees unclear The absorption of Cowan’s brokerage division into Schneider’s comes amid a prolonged period of intense competition among brokers as they vie for truckload freight in a market constrained by muted demand. It’s not immediately clear how many of Cowan’s brokerage employees Schneider plans to retain. A Cowan source who did not want to be identified told the Journal of Commerce Schneider “is basically retaining key employees, trucks [and] key accounts of Cowan’s.” The source said Schneider’s intent is to eliminate redundancies within its own brokerage division, and that its employees were instructed to push off discussions with customers about the dissolution of the Cowan Logistics brand until closer to October. At the time of the acquisition, the 100-year-old, Baltimore-based Cowan provided logistics, trucking, shipping and warehousing services, with a fleet of more than 1,800 trucks and about 7,500 trailers. Schneider will take over Cowan’s motor carrier (MC) number and standard carrier alpha code (SCAC), along with any of Cowan’s retained employees, clients and contracts. Until the rebranding is complete, Cowan’s leadership will largely remain in place but will report to Ben Schuchart, senior vice president of Schneider Transportation Management, and Jim Nicholson, vice president of brokerage operations for Schneider, according to the company email. Schneider is due to release its second-quarter earnings July 31. Contact Clarissa Hawes at clarissahawes@gmail.com .

Schneider National to ‘dissolve’ Cowan brokerage arm Oct. 1 in rebranding move

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US drayage truckers say costs and competition have been on the rise since the pandemic, while at the same time their pricing power is under downward pressure. </div>

US drayage truckers say costs and competition have been on the rise since the pandemic, while at the same time their pricing power is under downward pressure.

<div class="phx-topic">Drayage providers across the US say their survival is under increasing threat amid rising cost pressures driven by new competition, including technology-enabled platforms. To stay in business, operators are more often turning to mergers or acquisitions to bolster their companies in a bid to hold off competitors, market players told the Journal of Commerce. Drayage truckers say their costs have been rising since COVID-19, while at the same time their pricing power is under downward pressure. “We are in a situation where new entrants, brokers and AI [artificial intelligence] are in competition with us,” said Matt Schrap, CEO of the West Coast-based Harbor Trucking Association (HTA). “The lowest price wins.” Ken Kellaway, cofounder, chairman and president of RoadOne IntermodaLogistics, which has drayage operations across the country, said a price difference of as little as $50 among competitors will win the business. “The cost pressures are the largest I have seen in my career,” Kellaway said. Last week’s announcement <a href="https://www.ajot.com/insights/full/ai-gsc-shutdown-shocks-port-of-oakland-maritime-community">by Oakland-based drayage provider GSC Enterprises that it was shutting down its operations</a> has traditional operators wondering who is next. “It’s surprising that others haven’t fallen yet,” said Robert Loya, chief operating officer at TGS Logistics. <h3>Technology threat </h3>Traditional drayage companies in Los Angeles and Long Beach, many of whom have been operating for decades in the largest US port complex, are seeing market share erode as their contract-based customers seek lower prices from brokers, some of whom use tech-enabled platforms that allow freight interests to book freight directly with their competitors, Schrap said. RoadOne, based in the Northeast, sees the technology marketplace as the latest threat because it allows brokers to increase market share without investing in trucks, facilities or equipment. “Technology platforms position themselves as tech providers, but they’re really just brokers,” he said. “They’re taking market share as fast as they can. This is not sustainable [for traditional drayage providers].” But Michael Kroul, CEO of the truck broker KTI, said technology platforms are useful in that they help brokers see where the pricing market is in each region and where the freight opportunities are. He emphasized, though, that most brokers do not use the platforms as a tool to force rates lower at the expense of traditional drayage operators. “It’s not brokers who are causing rates to go down,” he said. “We’re not the lowest rate out there.” Kroul said the pricing pressure is due to the excess capacity that came into the drayage market during the post- COVID-19 boom when cargo volumes surged. “Everyone came into the market with COVID and many of them did not leave,” he said. Because drayage capacity exceeds demand, prices continue to trend lower while operating costs over the past three years have risen. “We see what costs operators are operating at, and it’s a tragedy,” Kroul said. Operating costs in California are rising faster than in many regions due to environmental rules that require the use of cleaner fuels, with the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/new-clean-truck-rule-puts-california-dray-capacity-on-chopping-block-5221564">ultimate goal being to phase out the sale of diesel trucks by 2035</a>. New truck sales by then must be zero-emission heavy-duty trucks. Drayage operators are also affected by <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/la-lb-port-interests-spar-with-agency-over-emissions-rule-under-development-5223229">“indirect source rules”</a> under which drayage operators serving the ports and warehouses must contribute to overall reductions in emissions at those locations. “California’s drayage truckers continue to be subject to the most stringent environmental rules of any state in the country,” the California Trucking Association said in a statement. “A prolonged, challenging rate downturn combined with a crushing, unpredictable regulatory environment is endangering our members’ ability to keep cargo flowing at some of the nation’s largest and most important port complexes.” <h3>Smaller companies in danger </h3>In today’s drayage environment, both in California and nationally, smaller drayage companies are being bought out by operators with “larger bankrolls,” TGS Logistics’ Loya said. “The bigger ones are going to get bigger and the smaller ones are going to go away,” he said. “Those companies with fewer than 50 trucks are struggling.” Kellaway said brutal price competition in the industry is the root problem in drayage, and, unfortunately, bankruptcies may be the result. “If bankruptcies accelerate, then maybe customers will start to take note,” he said. Added HTA’s Schrap: “This race to the [pricing] bottom has to end.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Drayage providers across the US say their survival is under increasing threat amid rising cost pressures driven by new competition, including technology-enabled platforms. To stay in business, operators are more often turning to mergers or acquisitions to bolster their companies in a bid to hold off competitors, market players told the Journal of Commerce. Drayage truckers say their costs have been rising since COVID-19, while at the same time their pricing power is under downward pressure. “We are in a situation where new entrants, brokers and AI [artificial intelligence] are in competition with us,” said Matt Schrap, CEO of the West Coast-based Harbor Trucking Association (HTA). “The lowest price wins.” Ken Kellaway, cofounder, chairman and president of RoadOne IntermodaLogistics, which has drayage operations across the country, said a price difference of as little as $50 among competitors will win the business. “The cost pressures are the largest I have seen in my career,” Kellaway said. Last week’s announcement by Oakland-based drayage provider GSC Enterprises that it was shutting down its operations has traditional operators wondering who is next. “It’s surprising that others haven’t fallen yet,” said Robert Loya, chief operating officer at TGS Logistics. Technology threat Traditional drayage companies in Los Angeles and Long Beach, many of whom have been operating for decades in the largest US port complex, are seeing market share erode as their contract-based customers seek lower prices from brokers, some of whom use tech-enabled platforms that allow freight interests to book freight directly with their competitors, Schrap said. RoadOne, based in the Northeast, sees the technology marketplace as the latest threat because it allows brokers to increase market share without investing in trucks, facilities or equipment. “Technology platforms position themselves as tech providers, but they’re really just brokers,” he said. “They’re taking market share as fast as they can. This is not sustainable [for traditional drayage providers].” But Michael Kroul, CEO of the truck broker KTI, said technology platforms are useful in that they help brokers see where the pricing market is in each region and where the freight opportunities are. He emphasized, though, that most brokers do not use the platforms as a tool to force rates lower at the expense of traditional drayage operators. “It’s not brokers who are causing rates to go down,” he said. “We’re not the lowest rate out there.” Kroul said the pricing pressure is due to the excess capacity that came into the drayage market during the post- COVID-19 boom when cargo volumes surged. “Everyone came into the market with COVID and many of them did not leave,” he said. Because drayage capacity exceeds demand, prices continue to trend lower while operating costs over the past three years have risen. “We see what costs operators are operating at, and it’s a tragedy,” Kroul said. Operating costs in California are rising faster than in many regions due to environmental rules that require the use of cleaner fuels, with the ultimate goal being to phase out the sale of diesel trucks by 2035 . New truck sales by then must be zero-emission heavy-duty trucks. Drayage operators are also affected by “indirect source rules” under which drayage operators serving the ports and warehouses must contribute to overall reductions in emissions at those locations. “California’s drayage truckers continue to be subject to the most stringent environmental rules of any state in the country,” the California Trucking Association said in a statement. “A prolonged, challenging rate downturn combined with a crushing, unpredictable regulatory environment is endangering our members’ ability to keep cargo flowing at some of the nation’s largest and most important port complexes.” Smaller companies in danger In today’s drayage environment, both in California and nationally, smaller drayage companies are being bought out by operators with “larger bankrolls,” TGS Logistics’ Loya said. “The bigger ones are going to get bigger and the smaller ones are going to go away,” he said. “Those companies with fewer than 50 trucks are struggling.” Kellaway said brutal price competition in the industry is the root problem in drayage, and, unfortunately, bankruptcies may be the result. “If bankruptcies accelerate, then maybe customers will start to take note,” he said. Added HTA’s Schrap: “This race to the [pricing] bottom has to end.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

CMA CGM reflags vessel in first move to boost size of US fleet

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

Looming August tariff deadline prompts carriers to pull trans-Pacific capacity

BNSF to use ‘southern’ route to Salt Lake City under UP intermodal deal

J.B. Hunt says surcharges necessary to maintain peak season service

Recent Commentary

Possible transcontinental rail a chance to ‘rewire’ US freight movements

Latest market ‘disruptor’ requires focused procurement approach by C-suites

Top 5 Most Read Stories