<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The carrier said that network adjustments that began in April will allow it to eliminate the impact of new US port fees for ships built in China on its shipper customers while maintaining US port coverage.</div>

The carrier said that network adjustments that began in April will allow it to eliminate the impact of new US port fees for ships built in China on its shipper customers while maintaining US port coverage.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">CMA CGM does not plan to charge shippers for the port fees it may face next month for using Chinese-built container ships in service on US trades, nor will it reduce US port coverage on those routes. The container carrier said Wednesday that it has made “fleet and operational adjustments” ahead of the Oct. 14 start date for <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scaled-back-ustr-port-tariff-to-hit-chinese-carriers-hardest-5987549">the US Trade Representative’s (USTR) new fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships calling US ports</a>. As such, CMA CGM “is not considering implementation of a surcharge on cargo shipped to or from the US at this time,” the company said. The fees, which could amount to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-port-tax-would-scramble-ocean-services-raise-shipper-costs-drewry-5952046">anywhere from $1 million to $3 million for the first US port call</a> and will escalate through 2028, resulted from federal investigations into Chinese dominance of the maritime industry that <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-port-tax-would-scramble-ocean-services-raise-shipper-costs-drewry-5952046">spanned the administrations of presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump</a>. “During the 180-day grace period following the April 17 USTR announcement, CMA CGM has taken the necessary steps to implement a robust and adaptive contingency plan,” the carrier said. “We currently expect to both maintain our service coverage to all scheduled US ports and minimize any impacts of the upcoming USTR fees.” Over the last six months, 141 different ships operated by CMA CGM called US ports, 22 of which were built in China, according to data from Sea-Web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. While some of those ships appear to be extra-loaders or making ad-hoc calls, a few ships that regularly called US ports appear to have been redeployed to serve non-US ports. In particular, CMA CGM removed larger post-Panamax ships, which would be subject to higher fees due to their capacity. For example, the CMA CGM Hermes, a 15,000-TEU ship built in Shanghai, has made 44 calls to the US over the last five years, but its last arrival at a US port was on March 31, according to Sea-Web. Since then, the ship has operated on CMA CGM’s Phoenician Express service between Asia and the Middle East. Sister ship CMA CGM Osiris, which last called Oakland in April, is likewise now serving the Middle East. The 15,000-TEU CMA CGM Zephyr, which made 33 port calls to the US over the last five years, is now dispatched to the carrier’s West Africa Express service. <h3>New orders skew toward China </h3>CMA CGM’s active global container fleet has slightly more tonnage built in South Korea, while its order book of new ships has more capacity slated for construction at shipyards China. According to Sea-Web, CMA CGM currently operates 274 container ships built in South Korea with a combined capacity of 2.18 million TEUs, 253 vessels (1.4 million TEUs) from yards in mainland China, and 125 ships built in Japan, Taiwan or Europe. The carrier has an additional 59 ships on order from China and 29 from South Korea. That sourcing diversification should allow CMA CGM to mitigate the new fees, CFO Ramon Fernandez said during <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgms-q2-earnings-slide-as-geopolitics-tariffs-hit-shipping-business-6052414">a July interview with the Journal of Commerce</a>, adding that the carrier wants to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-to-invest-20-billion-in-us-shipping-ports-and-logistics-5957748">support the Trump administration’s bid to restore the US shipbuilding industry</a>. “Part of our fleet is being built in in China, part of our fleet is being built in Korea, and so we will be able to manage whatever kind of regulation imposed on us,” Fernandez said. “We are also planning and working on building some vessels in the US, and we are currently discussing with different stakeholders in order to make sure that we can have competitive prices when we consider building ships in the US.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> Senior Editor Greg Knowler contributed to this article. </div>

CMA CGM does not plan to charge shippers for the port fees it may face next month for using Chinese-built container ships in service on US trades, nor will it reduce US port coverage on those routes. The container carrier said Wednesday that it has made “fleet and operational adjustments” ahead of the Oct. 14 start date for the US Trade Representative’s (USTR) new fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships calling US ports . As such, CMA CGM “is not considering implementation of a surcharge on cargo shipped to or from the US at this time,” the company said. The fees, which could amount to anywhere from $1 million to $3 million for the first US port call and will escalate through 2028, resulted from federal investigations into Chinese dominance of the maritime industry that spanned the administrations of presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump . “During the 180-day grace period following the April 17 USTR announcement, CMA CGM has taken the necessary steps to implement a robust and adaptive contingency plan,” the carrier said. “We currently expect to both maintain our service coverage to all scheduled US ports and minimize any impacts of the upcoming USTR fees.” Over the last six months, 141 different ships operated by CMA CGM called US ports, 22 of which were built in China, according to data from Sea-Web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. While some of those ships appear to be extra-loaders or making ad-hoc calls, a few ships that regularly called US ports appear to have been redeployed to serve non-US ports. In particular, CMA CGM removed larger post-Panamax ships, which would be subject to higher fees due to their capacity. For example, the CMA CGM Hermes, a 15,000-TEU ship built in Shanghai, has made 44 calls to the US over the last five years, but its last arrival at a US port was on March 31, according to Sea-Web. Since then, the ship has operated on CMA CGM’s Phoenician Express service between Asia and the Middle East. Sister ship CMA CGM Osiris, which last called Oakland in April, is likewise now serving the Middle East. The 15,000-TEU CMA CGM Zephyr, which made 33 port calls to the US over the last five years, is now dispatched to the carrier’s West Africa Express service. New orders skew toward China CMA CGM’s active global container fleet has slightly more tonnage built in South Korea, while its order book of new ships has more capacity slated for construction at shipyards China. According to Sea-Web, CMA CGM currently operates 274 container ships built in South Korea with a combined capacity of 2.18 million TEUs, 253 vessels (1.4 million TEUs) from yards in mainland China, and 125 ships built in Japan, Taiwan or Europe. The carrier has an additional 59 ships on order from China and 29 from South Korea. That sourcing diversification should allow CMA CGM to mitigate the new fees, CFO Ramon Fernandez said during a July interview with the Journal of Commerce, adding that the carrier wants to support the Trump administration’s bid to restore the US shipbuilding industry . “Part of our fleet is being built in in China, part of our fleet is being built in Korea, and so we will be able to manage whatever kind of regulation imposed on us,” Fernandez said. “We are also planning and working on building some vessels in the US, and we are currently discussing with different stakeholders in order to make sure that we can have competitive prices when we consider building ships in the US.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com Senior Editor Greg Knowler contributed to this article.

Trans-Pacific

North American ports

Container lines

CMA CGM reroutes China-built ships to avoid US port fees

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The World Shipping Council’s fight to have the FMC revise a key aspect of OSRA-22 hinges on how far the agency’s regulatory power extends into freight rates. </div>

The World Shipping Council’s fight to have the FMC revise a key aspect of OSRA-22 hinges on how far the agency’s regulatory power extends into freight rates.

<div class="phx-topic">A federal appeals court on Tuesday began weighing whether maritime regulators should consider high freight rates as evidence of ocean carriers unfairly refusing to serve cargo owners, in a test of how far regulators can go to protect US exporters. Yesterday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments from the World Shipping Council in its challenge of the Federal Maritime Commission’s (FMC) <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocean-carriers-face-new-fmc-rules-on-dealing-with-us-exporters-5703241">July 2024 rulemaking on the “unreasonable refusal to deal” provision</a> of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). Congress included the provision to protect <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-regulators-warn-container-lines-on-obligation-to-serve-exporters-5251170">US agriculture shippers who faced record-high freight rates and limited container space during COVID-19</a>. To enforce the provision, the FMC’s rulemaking said that an ocean carrier “quoting rates that are so far above current market rates” could be considered evidence for unfairly refusing vessel space to a shipper, allowing them to bring a complaint to the agency. However, Robert McGovern, an attorney for the World Shipping Council, which filed suit last September to have the FMC revise the rule, told the three-judge panel that the FMC overstepped its authority in that rule because Congress ended the FMC’s regulatory oversight of freight rates in 1984. Thus, that year, the agency began allowing carriers and cargo owners to enter private service contracts, instead of all freight moving under publicly filed tariffs. “There’s no scenario where a regulator that does not have statutory ratemaking authority can then turn around and tell regulated entities their rates are too high,” McGovern said. Under the rule, a shipper could leverage a complaint against an ocean carrier to negotiate a freight rate downward until the FMC determines a fair freight rate, McGovern said. “If that’s not rate setting, I don’t know what is,” he added. <h3>Rates only one factor: FMC </h3>The FMC, however, is only looking at rates as one factor in whether a carrier is refusing to deal with a shipper, not whether the rates themselves are too high, the agency’s attorney Harry Summers argued. Even though US ag shippers wanted to container space, ocean carriers used high rates to effectively turn away that business, he added. “Congress wanted the commission to strengthen this rule to avoid that,” Summers said. “It would be an easy way to achieve the same result of refusing to deal at all if they quote a rate that is absurdly high.” Other parts of US shipping law give the FMC oversight of rates and whether shippers are being charged nondiscriminatory rates, Summers said. The 2024 rulemaking is inline with those other aspects of shipping law, he said, adding that the agency employs economists and industry experts to determine what market rates are for ocean shipping. “Rates and charges are specifically provided for as something that the agency should look at,” Summers said. “Even though the commission can no longer set rates, it can evaluate rates to enforce other parts of the shipping act.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> </div>

A federal appeals court on Tuesday began weighing whether maritime regulators should consider high freight rates as evidence of ocean carriers unfairly refusing to serve cargo owners, in a test of how far regulators can go to protect US exporters. Yesterday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments from the World Shipping Council in its challenge of the Federal Maritime Commission’s (FMC) July 2024 rulemaking on the “unreasonable refusal to deal” provision of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 (OSRA-22). Congress included the provision to protect US agriculture shippers who faced record-high freight rates and limited container space during COVID-19 . To enforce the provision, the FMC’s rulemaking said that an ocean carrier “quoting rates that are so far above current market rates” could be considered evidence for unfairly refusing vessel space to a shipper, allowing them to bring a complaint to the agency. However, Robert McGovern, an attorney for the World Shipping Council, which filed suit last September to have the FMC revise the rule, told the three-judge panel that the FMC overstepped its authority in that rule because Congress ended the FMC’s regulatory oversight of freight rates in 1984. Thus, that year, the agency began allowing carriers and cargo owners to enter private service contracts, instead of all freight moving under publicly filed tariffs. “There’s no scenario where a regulator that does not have statutory ratemaking authority can then turn around and tell regulated entities their rates are too high,” McGovern said. Under the rule, a shipper could leverage a complaint against an ocean carrier to negotiate a freight rate downward until the FMC determines a fair freight rate, McGovern said. “If that’s not rate setting, I don’t know what is,” he added. Rates only one factor: FMC The FMC, however, is only looking at rates as one factor in whether a carrier is refusing to deal with a shipper, not whether the rates themselves are too high, the agency’s attorney Harry Summers argued. Even though US ag shippers wanted to container space, ocean carriers used high rates to effectively turn away that business, he added. “Congress wanted the commission to strengthen this rule to avoid that,” Summers said. “It would be an easy way to achieve the same result of refusing to deal at all if they quote a rate that is absurdly high.” Other parts of US shipping law give the FMC oversight of rates and whether shippers are being charged nondiscriminatory rates, Summers said. The 2024 rulemaking is inline with those other aspects of shipping law, he said, adding that the agency employs economists and industry experts to determine what market rates are for ocean shipping. “Rates and charges are specifically provided for as something that the agency should look at,” Summers said. “Even though the commission can no longer set rates, it can evaluate rates to enforce other parts of the shipping act.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

DC court hears challenge to FMC rulemaking on refusal to deal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Aug. 29 global removal of duty-free access for low-value US imports comes ahead of the end-of-year peak season for air freight. </div>

The Aug. 29 global removal of duty-free access for low-value US imports comes ahead of the end-of-year peak season for air freight.

<div class="phx-topic">Small and medium-sized businesses will shoulder most of the higher costs accrued through the elimination of “de minimis” exemption allowing low-value imports to avoid US duties, hurting air cargo volumes in the upcoming end-of-peak season, according to industry executives. After scrapping the duty-free exemption for low-value imports from China valued at under $800 on May 2, the White House on Aug. 29 extended the de minimis removal globally. Shipments that previously entered the US duty-free under Section 321 (the de minimis statute) must now follow standard entry procedures, including full customs filings. All imports, except letters and documents with no value and purely private shipments of gifts with a value under $100, now face duties. “Small and medium-sized exporters will have a massive problem,” Ronald Kleijwegt, CEO at Vinturas, a global supply chain collaboration network, told the Journal of Commerce. “A big portion of e-commerce is related to SMEs, not just the big Temus and Sheins of the world.” Compliance with the new rules will require substantial modification of shipment control processes, leading to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/postal-groups-cite-customs-compliance-issues-in-us-shipment-suspensions-6070276">the suspension of postal shipments to the US</a> by many state and private organizations, citing their inability to comply with the timeline provided by Customs and Border Protection. The closing of that particular channel to the US will have a significant impact on the margins of small and medium-sized enterprise (SMEs), Kleijwegt warned. ”If you’re a small company in the UK or in the Netherlands with an e-commerce shop sending products to importers in the US that are valued at under $800, they would go through customs with no problem,” he said. “The shipment will be stopped at customs, and there will be import duty to be paid. The question is, will importers be willing to pay the duty and pass it on, and will customers be prepared to pay for the more expensive products,” Kleijwegt noted. <h3>Update pricing to reflect new customs duties </h3>In a recent customer notice, Maersk alluded to the potential loss of competitiveness facing customers. The carrier advised shippers to pause low-value US shipments until customs rules were clarified, while at the same time updating product pricing to reflect any added duties and to explore US-based warehousing or fulfilment solutions “to stay competitive.” Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight officer at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, highlighted the effect of the US rule change on SMEs in an August market update. “A lot of people think of de minimis as being about B2C (business-to-consumer), but the de minimis changes now in effect are also a big thing for B2B (business-to-business) into the US, and we are already seeing some SME businesses reacting to, and challenging, this impact,” he said. Van de Wouw warned that the removal of the de minimis rule may have “a profound effect” on the end-of-year air freight peak season. “The starting point for closing the de minimis threshold was mainly politically motivated against the big Chinese e-commerce platforms,” he said. “But the widening of this legislation is leveling the playing field again for all e-commerce shipments entering the US, and I would now expect to see lower e-commerce volumes moving by air from Europe to the US.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Small and medium-sized businesses will shoulder most of the higher costs accrued through the elimination of “de minimis” exemption allowing low-value imports to avoid US duties, hurting air cargo volumes in the upcoming end-of-peak season, according to industry executives. After scrapping the duty-free exemption for low-value imports from China valued at under $800 on May 2, the White House on Aug. 29 extended the de minimis removal globally. Shipments that previously entered the US duty-free under Section 321 (the de minimis statute) must now follow standard entry procedures, including full customs filings. All imports, except letters and documents with no value and purely private shipments of gifts with a value under $100, now face duties. “Small and medium-sized exporters will have a massive problem,” Ronald Kleijwegt, CEO at Vinturas, a global supply chain collaboration network, told the Journal of Commerce. “A big portion of e-commerce is related to SMEs, not just the big Temus and Sheins of the world.” Compliance with the new rules will require substantial modification of shipment control processes, leading to the suspension of postal shipments to the US by many state and private organizations, citing their inability to comply with the timeline provided by Customs and Border Protection. The closing of that particular channel to the US will have a significant impact on the margins of small and medium-sized enterprise (SMEs), Kleijwegt warned. ”If you’re a small company in the UK or in the Netherlands with an e-commerce shop sending products to importers in the US that are valued at under $800, they would go through customs with no problem,” he said. “The shipment will be stopped at customs, and there will be import duty to be paid. The question is, will importers be willing to pay the duty and pass it on, and will customers be prepared to pay for the more expensive products,” Kleijwegt noted. Update pricing to reflect new customs duties In a recent customer notice, Maersk alluded to the potential loss of competitiveness facing customers. The carrier advised shippers to pause low-value US shipments until customs rules were clarified, while at the same time updating product pricing to reflect any added duties and to explore US-based warehousing or fulfilment solutions “to stay competitive.” Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight officer at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, highlighted the effect of the US rule change on SMEs in an August market update. “A lot of people think of de minimis as being about B2C (business-to-consumer), but the de minimis changes now in effect are also a big thing for B2B (business-to-business) into the US, and we are already seeing some SME businesses reacting to, and challenging, this impact,” he said. Van de Wouw warned that the removal of the de minimis rule may have “a profound effect” on the end-of-year air freight peak season. “The starting point for closing the de minimis threshold was mainly politically motivated against the big Chinese e-commerce platforms,” he said. “But the widening of this legislation is leveling the playing field again for all e-commerce shipments entering the US, and I would now expect to see lower e-commerce volumes moving by air from Europe to the US.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo

Elimination of US ‘de minimis’ rule hits SMEs hardest

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The two Class I railroads will collaborate on a service to replace the trucking leg for goods moving from CN’s Memphis terminal to the Music City.</div>

The two Class I railroads will collaborate on a service to replace the trucking leg for goods moving from CN’s Memphis terminal to the Music City.

<div class="phx-topic">Canadian National Railway and CSX Transportation are planning a new international intermodal service from Canada’s West Coast into Nashville, expanding shipper options outside of the US Southeast. The signing of a memorandum by the two Class I railroads paves the way for a more direct, and thus, faster service and another option beyond routing in and out of the port of Savannah. The move is the latest integration between railroads amid <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-looks-to-create-first-coast-to-coast-railroad-with-85-billion-ns-deal-6052288">the planned transcontinental merger of Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern</a>, which would create the largest North American railroad. CN offers service from Canada’s West Coast into Memphis but not into Nashville. The service would replace an approximately 200-mile truck trip for international containers from Memphis to Nashville, using CSX tracks. In an average year, about 20,000 ocean containers are railed from Vancouver to Memphis, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of data from the US Surface Transportation Board, but with very little export cargo moving in the other direction. It’s unclear how many of those containers remain in Memphis versus getting drayed to Nashville. CSX’s Nashville terminal currently has inbound international service from the ports of Los Angeles, Seattle-Tacoma, Savannah and Charleston, with outbound service to Savannah and Charleston. In August, CSX announced plans to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bnsf-csx-unveil-new-joint-intermodal-lanes-in-aftermath-of-up-ns-merger-6067789">develop international intermodal routes with BNSF Railway from the West Coast to the Southeast</a>. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> </div>

Canadian National Railway and CSX Transportation are planning a new international intermodal service from Canada’s West Coast into Nashville, expanding shipper options outside of the US Southeast. The signing of a memorandum by the two Class I railroads paves the way for a more direct, and thus, faster service and another option beyond routing in and out of the port of Savannah. The move is the latest integration between railroads amid the planned transcontinental merger of Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern , which would create the largest North American railroad. CN offers service from Canada’s West Coast into Memphis but not into Nashville. The service would replace an approximately 200-mile truck trip for international containers from Memphis to Nashville, using CSX tracks. In an average year, about 20,000 ocean containers are railed from Vancouver to Memphis, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of data from the US Surface Transportation Board, but with very little export cargo moving in the other direction. It’s unclear how many of those containers remain in Memphis versus getting drayed to Nashville. CSX’s Nashville terminal currently has inbound international service from the ports of Los Angeles, Seattle-Tacoma, Savannah and Charleston, with outbound service to Savannah and Charleston. In August, CSX announced plans to develop international intermodal routes with BNSF Railway from the West Coast to the Southeast . Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

CN-CSX joint service to connect west Canada and Nashville

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US retailers increased September and October import volume expectations significantly, but it will not be enough to meet 2024 levels. </div>

US retailers increased September and October import volume expectations significantly, but it will not be enough to meet 2024 levels.

<div class="phx-topic">US retailers on Tuesday said they are bringing in more imports than they projected a month ago but are still on track to ship less in the fourth quarter than they did in the same period last year. According to the latest Global Port Tracker (GPT) from Hackett Associates on behalf of the National Retail Federation (NRF), inbound container volumes will fall 6.8% year over year in September, a sharp upward revision from the 19.4% drop <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-project-big-year-over-year-import-declines-to-close-out-2025-6060323">forecast a month ago</a>. That upward revision will equate to about 300,000 TEUs of additional imports compared with the previous projection. The improved-but-still-<a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocean-carrier-profit-margins-earnings-outlook-for-2025-trimmed-further-6074809">downbeat outlook</a> for import volumes for the rest of the year comes after US importers <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/premier-alliance-service-halt-latest-sign-of-trans-pacific-demand-downturn-6076326">frontloaded imports for months</a> to avoid higher US tariffs and as retail sales slow. The year-over-year declines are also steeper because cargo owners front-loaded cargo last fall to avoid US East and Gulf Coast labor strikes. “Tariffs have had a significant impact on trade,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said in the latest GPT. “The trade outlook for the final months of the year is not optimistic.” Despite slower job growth and higher consumer inflation, US retail sales remain solid. US retail sales in July and June rose 0.5% year over year thanks in part to people buying vehicles to avoid higher prices resulting from new steel tariffs. US importers plan to bring about 290,000 TEUs less cargo in October, 420,000 TEUs less in November and 430,000 TEUs less in December than in the same months in 2024. Actual US laden container imports from Asia spiked 25.7% year over year in July as tariffs pushed importers to move peak season and holiday goods earlier than usual, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&amp;P Global. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="70970c23-b1c8-4e32-a007-d4c69ada36f8"></dynamic-object></div>“Retailers have stocked up as much as they can ahead of tariff increases,” Jonathan Gold, vice president for supply chain and customs policy at the NRF, said in the latest GPT report. “But the uncertainty of US trade policy is making it impossible to make the long-term plans that are critical to future business success.” US retailers are keeping just enough stock in hand, holding about 1.3 months of inventory from January through June, according to the latest data from the US Census Bureau. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d1f4c911-fe90-4716-8dd0-46a2d22dbd8b"></dynamic-object></div>Importers “are very cautious about holding on to inventory because of the tariffs,” a consultant who formerly held top logistics positions at two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. “In certain sectors, demand is soft,” the consultant added. In addition, a number of businesses are reducing the inventory they carry because the tariff situation is so chaotic, a forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The less inventory they carry, the less potential there is to be impacted by the tariff volatility, the forwarder said. Because Lunar New Year falls on Feb. 17 in 2026, rather than in January, there is less of an impetus for retailers to begin restocking in December. Even so, US retailers plan to import 19.1% less in January 2026 than a year prior, according to the GPT report. US retail sales in November and December will rise 4% year over year, compared to a 10-year compound annual growth rate of 5.2%, according to consultancy Bain &amp; Co. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US retailers on Tuesday said they are bringing in more imports than they projected a month ago but are still on track to ship less in the fourth quarter than they did in the same period last year. According to the latest Global Port Tracker (GPT) from Hackett Associates on behalf of the National Retail Federation (NRF), inbound container volumes will fall 6.8% year over year in September, a sharp upward revision from the 19.4% drop forecast a month ago . That upward revision will equate to about 300,000 TEUs of additional imports compared with the previous projection. The improved-but-still- downbeat outlook for import volumes for the rest of the year comes after US importers frontloaded imports for months to avoid higher US tariffs and as retail sales slow. The year-over-year declines are also steeper because cargo owners front-loaded cargo last fall to avoid US East and Gulf Coast labor strikes. “Tariffs have had a significant impact on trade,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said in the latest GPT. “The trade outlook for the final months of the year is not optimistic.” Despite slower job growth and higher consumer inflation, US retail sales remain solid. US retail sales in July and June rose 0.5% year over year thanks in part to people buying vehicles to avoid higher prices resulting from new steel tariffs. US importers plan to bring about 290,000 TEUs less cargo in October, 420,000 TEUs less in November and 430,000 TEUs less in December than in the same months in 2024. Actual US laden container imports from Asia spiked 25.7% year over year in July as tariffs pushed importers to move peak season and holiday goods earlier than usual, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&P Global. “Retailers have stocked up as much as they can ahead of tariff increases,” Jonathan Gold, vice president for supply chain and customs policy at the NRF, said in the latest GPT report. “But the uncertainty of US trade policy is making it impossible to make the long-term plans that are critical to future business success.” US retailers are keeping just enough stock in hand, holding about 1.3 months of inventory from January through June, according to the latest data from the US Census Bureau. Importers “are very cautious about holding on to inventory because of the tariffs,” a consultant who formerly held top logistics positions at two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. “In certain sectors, demand is soft,” the consultant added. In addition, a number of businesses are reducing the inventory they carry because the tariff situation is so chaotic, a forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The less inventory they carry, the less potential there is to be impacted by the tariff volatility, the forwarder said. Because Lunar New Year falls on Feb. 17 in 2026, rather than in January, there is less of an impetus for retailers to begin restocking in December. Even so, US retailers plan to import 19.1% less in January 2026 than a year prior, according to the GPT report. US retail sales in November and December will rise 4% year over year, compared to a 10-year compound annual growth rate of 5.2%, according to consultancy Bain & Co. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .  Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Forwarding

Container Shipping News

US retailers upgrade import forecast but still expect Q4 decline

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The US trucking market is stable, and it’s likely to stay that way until demand increases truck utilization significantly, FTR said at its 2025 transportation conference. </div>

The US trucking market is stable, and it’s likely to stay that way until demand increases truck utilization significantly, FTR said at its 2025 transportation conference.

<div class="phx-topic">Stubborn US truck overcapacity is not likely to shift before 2027, prolonging shipper pricing power, according to FTR Transportation Intelligence. Excess capacity has become the norm in the truckload sector, Avery Vise, vice president of trucking at FTR, said Tuesday at the 2025 FTR Transportation Conference in Indianapolis. “There’s been a stabilization of the carrier population” after three years of low freight demand, Vise said. Despite some significant motor carrier closures, “we still have this real large overhang of very small carriers that for whatever reason is not exiting the market.” In August, the number of US truck drivers employed at fleets with one to five trucks was 39% higher than in March 2020, according to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) data, Vise told the conference, which the Journal of Commerce attended virtually. That’s down from a 62% gain over March 2020 reported for July 2022, but still a substantial increase in capacity from pre-pandemic levels. The same data shows the number of drivers at carriers with 101 or more trucks down 1.1% in August from March 2020. There’s been a <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-truck-capacity-shifting-as-spot-rates-drop-5245829">long-term shift</a> of truck drivers from large carriers to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/revised-us-payroll-numbers-underscore-truckload-market-shift-5965577">smaller operators</a>, Vise said. Despite predictions that more carriers are likely to be pushed out of the business by low rates, FTR does not expect the number to fall much further, absent an unexpected event or recession. ”We haven’t seen any real tightening in the market since 2024,” he said. “Not until we get to 2027 do we expect active truck utilization to be stronger than now to any significant degree.” Active truck utilization as measured by FTR has hovered between 92% and 94% since 2024. “From a carrier perspective, that means a lot more focus on cutting costs and getting much more productivity out of everything,” Vise said. With capacity stable, FTR does not expect the type of rate recovery many trucking companies would like to see. “We do see an increase in rates,” but not a strong one, Vise said. “It’s just going to inch along, falling below the levels of inflation. That may be one of the reason the utilization forecast is so weak.” FTR forecasts a 1.5% annualized gain in dry-van truckload contract rates in 2025, following a 3.1% drop in 2024, and a 1.2% gain in 2026. Spot dry-van rates are expected to rise 1.3% in 2025 and 1.4% in 2026, according to the research firm. <h3>Demand versus supply </h3>A missing demand catalyst, such as increased consumer spending on goods, is needed to tighten capacity, according to FTR. Without higher demand, there may be little room for motor carriers to cut much more capacity. Carriers still have debt and other obligations to meet, Vise noted. The Journal of Commerce Truckload Capacity Index (TCI), which measures truck counts at large, publicly owned carriers, increased for the first time in 11 quarters in the second quarter, rising 1.1 percentage points. That’s a sign some carriers are preparing for higher volumes in late 2025 and 2026. Some speakers at the conference believed cuts in supply, rather than increased demand, would drive a rate recovery for trucking. “I don’t think it’s going to be consumption that pulls us out (of the freight downturn), but it will be capacity,” said Matt Perry, senior vice president of account management at Werner Enterprises. Carriers with 200 or 300 trucks may be more at risk than smaller operators, he said. “There are a lot of companies that are one big accident, one customer loss away from not being able to continue,” Perry said. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto://bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a></div>

Stubborn US truck overcapacity is not likely to shift before 2027, prolonging shipper pricing power, according to FTR Transportation Intelligence. Excess capacity has become the norm in the truckload sector, Avery Vise, vice president of trucking at FTR, said Tuesday at the 2025 FTR Transportation Conference in Indianapolis. “There’s been a stabilization of the carrier population” after three years of low freight demand, Vise said. Despite some significant motor carrier closures, “we still have this real large overhang of very small carriers that for whatever reason is not exiting the market.” In August, the number of US truck drivers employed at fleets with one to five trucks was 39% higher than in March 2020, according to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) data, Vise told the conference, which the Journal of Commerce attended virtually. That’s down from a 62% gain over March 2020 reported for July 2022, but still a substantial increase in capacity from pre-pandemic levels. The same data shows the number of drivers at carriers with 101 or more trucks down 1.1% in August from March 2020. There’s been a long-term shift of truck drivers from large carriers to smaller operators , Vise said. Despite predictions that more carriers are likely to be pushed out of the business by low rates, FTR does not expect the number to fall much further, absent an unexpected event or recession. ”We haven’t seen any real tightening in the market since 2024,” he said. “Not until we get to 2027 do we expect active truck utilization to be stronger than now to any significant degree.” Active truck utilization as measured by FTR has hovered between 92% and 94% since 2024. “From a carrier perspective, that means a lot more focus on cutting costs and getting much more productivity out of everything,” Vise said. With capacity stable, FTR does not expect the type of rate recovery many trucking companies would like to see. “We do see an increase in rates,” but not a strong one, Vise said. “It’s just going to inch along, falling below the levels of inflation. That may be one of the reason the utilization forecast is so weak.” FTR forecasts a 1.5% annualized gain in dry-van truckload contract rates in 2025, following a 3.1% drop in 2024, and a 1.2% gain in 2026. Spot dry-van rates are expected to rise 1.3% in 2025 and 1.4% in 2026, according to the research firm. Demand versus supply A missing demand catalyst, such as increased consumer spending on goods, is needed to tighten capacity, according to FTR. Without higher demand, there may be little room for motor carriers to cut much more capacity. Carriers still have debt and other obligations to meet, Vise noted. The Journal of Commerce Truckload Capacity Index (TCI), which measures truck counts at large, publicly owned carriers, increased for the first time in 11 quarters in the second quarter, rising 1.1 percentage points. That’s a sign some carriers are preparing for higher volumes in late 2025 and 2026. Some speakers at the conference believed cuts in supply, rather than increased demand, would drive a rate recovery for trucking. “I don’t think it’s going to be consumption that pulls us out (of the freight downturn), but it will be capacity,” said Matt Perry, senior vice president of account management at Werner Enterprises. Carriers with 200 or 300 trucks may be more at risk than smaller operators, he said. “There are a lot of companies that are one big accident, one customer loss away from not being able to continue,” Perry said. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com

Trucking News

Truckload

Surface

‘Excess’ truck capacity to linger through 2027: FTR

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">There are measures carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply — and thus price — collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution, writes Jeremy Masters. </div>

There are measures carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply — and thus price — collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution, writes Jeremy Masters.

<div class="phx-topic">The laws of supply and demand dictate that prices will move in accordance with the relativity of the two. Container carriers can marginally move the dial between what is containerized and what is bulk or breakbulk by offering very attractive (low contribution) rates. An innovative product — for example, Gemini Cooperation’s high reliability network or an express service — might lure some air freight to sea freight. For the most part, however, carriers have very little control over demand. The key price lever that carriers have is slot supply, and current fundamentals point to heavy surplus, even as diversions around southern Africa continue. Are the carriers, then, sprinting to the edge of the cliff with newbuild deliveries, fresh orders, second-hand buying and chartering of what little spare capacity is left, followed by a freefall? Or do they at least have a parachute to slow down their momentum? There are some things they can do to help themselves in trades with overcapacity. <h3>Pushing pause </h3>The most obvious and dramatic way would be to park ships. To be impactful, that would mean collectively taking out multiple strings rather than tinkering with single strings or blank sailings. Understandably, there is a mental block in the big east-west trades when it comes to parking high-capacity, high-value, newer ships. But if the carriers get supply even minimally below demand, the economics are massively in their favor. Let's assume that, in the Asia-to-Europe trade, each consortium (for these purposes, Mediterranean Shipping Co. would be considered a consortium) ties up one string of ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs) that was forecasted to make a minimal contribution to fixed cost because of declining rates. If, because of removing these strings, freight rates were a very conservative $500 per TEU higher on average on the headhaul than they would have been, based on 20,000 TEU per week and 50 weeks, all consortiums would accumulate an additional $500,000 million per annum on all remaining loops. There would be, of course, some incremental lay-up costs, but other costs would remain similar. Parking some $3 billion worth of assets per consortium is easier in theory than in practice, especially for those carriers who need to justify some heavy investments to their boards. If the carriers accept that drastic action is required, however, and there is enough collective action — not orchestrated action, of course, in contravention of competition rules — then the results will be dramatically better, and the ships will be readily available for an upturn. <h3>Beyond parking </h3>Are there less capacity-eating measures that carriers could undertake? The catalyst for a major dive in multi-trade rates would be a return to the Red Sea and Suez Canal for Asia-to-Europe strings, but it's unlikely that we will go overnight from high-risk Red Sea transits to totally safe ones. Given the disruption and risk — for carriers and their clients — of moving all strings back to the Red Sea only to find that further issues arise, it would be entirely justifiable to keep some strings moving around the Cape of Good Hope. Big beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) and forwarders/non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) have — forcefully — adjusted to the Cape routing. And while there is higher on-the-water inventory cost, the weekly pipeline of arrivals are established. They would naturally lean towards the faster Red Sea routing, but at the same time, would want to strenuously avoid a situation where production lines are stopped or shelves empty because they have put all their eggs in the Red Sea basket that has turned bad again. This may be counterintuitive, given more expensive ship systems around the Cape, but carriers could also implement two-tier pricing to re-enforce this prudence — essentially, a premium for Red Sea risk or a deficit for longer transits, whichever you prefer. Slow-steaming is another area of capacity control where a systematic approach could eat up more capacity. This means not just applying it in over-tonnaged trades, but in all trades. Tonnage can then be moved from trades where there is oversupply to those that are short because of slow-steaming. Finally, there is the scrapping of older vessels. If we look at carriers' desire to hold onto bigger, newer assets and their purchase of relatively old smaller tonnage to run regional and feeder networks, this does not look to be a particularly encouraging area for capacity shedding. There are measures the carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply – and thus price – collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution. Contact Jeremy Masters at <a href="mailto:jeremy@shippingmastershk.com">jeremy@shippingmastershk.com</a>. </div>

The laws of supply and demand dictate that prices will move in accordance with the relativity of the two. Container carriers can marginally move the dial between what is containerized and what is bulk or breakbulk by offering very attractive (low contribution) rates. An innovative product — for example, Gemini Cooperation’s high reliability network or an express service — might lure some air freight to sea freight. For the most part, however, carriers have very little control over demand. The key price lever that carriers have is slot supply, and current fundamentals point to heavy surplus, even as diversions around southern Africa continue. Are the carriers, then, sprinting to the edge of the cliff with newbuild deliveries, fresh orders, second-hand buying and chartering of what little spare capacity is left, followed by a freefall? Or do they at least have a parachute to slow down their momentum? There are some things they can do to help themselves in trades with overcapacity. Pushing pause The most obvious and dramatic way would be to park ships. To be impactful, that would mean collectively taking out multiple strings rather than tinkering with single strings or blank sailings. Understandably, there is a mental block in the big east-west trades when it comes to parking high-capacity, high-value, newer ships. But if the carriers get supply even minimally below demand, the economics are massively in their favor. Let's assume that, in the Asia-to-Europe trade, each consortium (for these purposes, Mediterranean Shipping Co. would be considered a consortium) ties up one string of ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs) that was forecasted to make a minimal contribution to fixed cost because of declining rates. If, because of removing these strings, freight rates were a very conservative $500 per TEU higher on average on the headhaul than they would have been, based on 20,000 TEU per week and 50 weeks, all consortiums would accumulate an additional $500,000 million per annum on all remaining loops. There would be, of course, some incremental lay-up costs, but other costs would remain similar. Parking some $3 billion worth of assets per consortium is easier in theory than in practice, especially for those carriers who need to justify some heavy investments to their boards. If the carriers accept that drastic action is required, however, and there is enough collective action — not orchestrated action, of course, in contravention of competition rules — then the results will be dramatically better, and the ships will be readily available for an upturn. Beyond parking Are there less capacity-eating measures that carriers could undertake? The catalyst for a major dive in multi-trade rates would be a return to the Red Sea and Suez Canal for Asia-to-Europe strings, but it's unlikely that we will go overnight from high-risk Red Sea transits to totally safe ones. Given the disruption and risk — for carriers and their clients — of moving all strings back to the Red Sea only to find that further issues arise, it would be entirely justifiable to keep some strings moving around the Cape of Good Hope. Big beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) and forwarders/non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) have — forcefully — adjusted to the Cape routing. And while there is higher on-the-water inventory cost, the weekly pipeline of arrivals are established. They would naturally lean towards the faster Red Sea routing, but at the same time, would want to strenuously avoid a situation where production lines are stopped or shelves empty because they have put all their eggs in the Red Sea basket that has turned bad again. This may be counterintuitive, given more expensive ship systems around the Cape, but carriers could also implement two-tier pricing to re-enforce this prudence — essentially, a premium for Red Sea risk or a deficit for longer transits, whichever you prefer. Slow-steaming is another area of capacity control where a systematic approach could eat up more capacity. This means not just applying it in over-tonnaged trades, but in all trades. Tonnage can then be moved from trades where there is oversupply to those that are short because of slow-steaming. Finally, there is the scrapping of older vessels. If we look at carriers' desire to hold onto bigger, newer assets and their purchase of relatively old smaller tonnage to run regional and feeder networks, this does not look to be a particularly encouraging area for capacity shedding. There are measures the carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply – and thus price – collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution. Contact Jeremy Masters at jeremy@shippingmastershk.com .

Maritime

Ocean carriers are not helpless when it comes to managing capacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base.</div>

The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base.

<div class="phx-topic">For decades, international containerized freight from Michigan and the broader Midwest has been routed through distant US coastal gateways such as New York, Norfolk and Savannah, or Canadian ports such as Halifax and Montreal. Export-side users have included automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), steel and chemical producers and agricultural shippers, while imports have consisted of tier 1 suppliers, machinery and equipment distributors and retail or e-commerce consolidators. These routes were not chosen for efficiency or cost. They were imposed by federal restrictions that have for decades prevented containerized freight from entering or exiting the Great Lakes by vessel. US Customs today does not permit such movements through Michigan because no facility in the state meets the required federal standards for security and processing. That is about to change. In 2026, the Port of Monroe will activate the first SAFE Port Act-compliant international container terminal in the Great Lakes, along with a new roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) platform that complements existing vessel berths, dual Class I rail access and proximity to interstate highways and Midwest manufacturing. Together, these assets position Monroe as a fully integrated inland gateway for containerized trade and high-value industrial logistics. Conservatively, 1 million to 2 million TEUs of oceangoing cargo are generated annually from the Great Lakes’ industrial core, according to port estimates. This includes high-value shipments from sectors such as automotive, machinery, chemicals and electronics. Rather than projecting future throughput volumes, the Port of Monroe is focused on establishing a lawful and functioning corridor, allowing the market to respond. The goal is to restore balance, provide carriers with a practical entry point and give shippers a logistics option that should have existed decades ago. The terminal at Monroe will be available to operators who recognize the value of establishing service in an underserved but strategically positioned market. The automotive industry, in particular, stands to benefit. With production concentrated in the Midwest and export demand on the rise, direct vessel service from Monroe reduces complexity and supports just-in-time inventory models. Monroe offers a new point of connection between Midwest production and global markets, serving as a strategic outlet for general containerized freight and, more uniquely, for the direct shipment of new vehicles via ro/ro or in containers. Resilience has become a defining priority for today’s logistics networks. The March 2024 collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, a critical ro/ro and vehicle export hub, exposed the system’s fragility. Overnight, cargo flows were disrupted, schedules were delayed and shippers were forced to reroute at significant cost. Inland ports such as the Port of Monroe offer a hedge against that kind of single-point failure. <h3>‘Manageable’ constraints </h3>Do the Great Lakes have constraints? Yes, but they are manageable. The annual three-month winter closure of the St. Lawrence Seaway is predictable and published well in advance, allowing cargo owners and carriers to plan accordingly. Intra-lake shipping continues throughout the winter, particularly with ice-class vessels. Recent climate trends indicate shorter freeze periods and milder conditions, which are gradually increasing intralake shipping capacity during the winter months. Other northern regions facing even harsher winter conditions have demonstrated what is possible. The Baltic Sea offers a relevant example. Despite a smaller economic footprint and more severe ice conditions, Baltic ports remain active year-round through the use of ice-capable vessels and integrated multimodal infrastructure. There is no reason the Great Lakes, now that the regulatory path has been cleared, should not do the same and make a comparable contribution to North American trade resilience. Unlike coastal gateways, which face sudden disruptions from hurricanes, labor action and infrastructure failures, the risks on the Great Lakes are stable and foreseeable. That reliability offers a competitive advantage for shippers navigating global volatility. But infrastructure alone is not enough. What is required is a shift in mindset. Federal freight policy must treat the Great Lakes as a fully integrated corridor. Carriers need to revisit assumptions about vessel size and routing patterns. Shippers will now be able to prioritize proximity, reliability and carbon performance rather than adhering to legacy paths shaped by outdated restrictions. The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base. Supporting inland container movement by vessel can drive demand for US-built ships, sustain skilled shipyard jobs, and expand the national maritime workforce. This is not just a logistics upgrade. It is a long-term investment in national capacity, employment, and competitiveness. This is a practical opportunity to enhance the national freight system using inland infrastructure that is efficient, cost-effective and underutilized. Monroe stands ready to serve shippers, carriers and policymakers seeking flexible, durable solutions. The Great Lakes have always had the potential to support containerized trade. Now that the path is open, the Port of Monroe is prepared to deliver. Capt. Paul C. LaMarre III is also director of the Port of Monroe in Michigan. Contact him at <a href="mailto:plamarre@portofmonroe.com">plamarre@portofmonroe.com</a>. </div>

For decades, international containerized freight from Michigan and the broader Midwest has been routed through distant US coastal gateways such as New York, Norfolk and Savannah, or Canadian ports such as Halifax and Montreal. Export-side users have included automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), steel and chemical producers and agricultural shippers, while imports have consisted of tier 1 suppliers, machinery and equipment distributors and retail or e-commerce consolidators. These routes were not chosen for efficiency or cost. They were imposed by federal restrictions that have for decades prevented containerized freight from entering or exiting the Great Lakes by vessel. US Customs today does not permit such movements through Michigan because no facility in the state meets the required federal standards for security and processing. That is about to change. In 2026, the Port of Monroe will activate the first SAFE Port Act-compliant international container terminal in the Great Lakes, along with a new roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) platform that complements existing vessel berths, dual Class I rail access and proximity to interstate highways and Midwest manufacturing. Together, these assets position Monroe as a fully integrated inland gateway for containerized trade and high-value industrial logistics. Conservatively, 1 million to 2 million TEUs of oceangoing cargo are generated annually from the Great Lakes’ industrial core, according to port estimates. This includes high-value shipments from sectors such as automotive, machinery, chemicals and electronics. Rather than projecting future throughput volumes, the Port of Monroe is focused on establishing a lawful and functioning corridor, allowing the market to respond. The goal is to restore balance, provide carriers with a practical entry point and give shippers a logistics option that should have existed decades ago. The terminal at Monroe will be available to operators who recognize the value of establishing service in an underserved but strategically positioned market. The automotive industry, in particular, stands to benefit. With production concentrated in the Midwest and export demand on the rise, direct vessel service from Monroe reduces complexity and supports just-in-time inventory models. Monroe offers a new point of connection between Midwest production and global markets, serving as a strategic outlet for general containerized freight and, more uniquely, for the direct shipment of new vehicles via ro/ro or in containers. Resilience has become a defining priority for today’s logistics networks. The March 2024 collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, a critical ro/ro and vehicle export hub, exposed the system’s fragility. Overnight, cargo flows were disrupted, schedules were delayed and shippers were forced to reroute at significant cost. Inland ports such as the Port of Monroe offer a hedge against that kind of single-point failure. ‘Manageable’ constraints Do the Great Lakes have constraints? Yes, but they are manageable. The annual three-month winter closure of the St. Lawrence Seaway is predictable and published well in advance, allowing cargo owners and carriers to plan accordingly. Intra-lake shipping continues throughout the winter, particularly with ice-class vessels. Recent climate trends indicate shorter freeze periods and milder conditions, which are gradually increasing intralake shipping capacity during the winter months. Other northern regions facing even harsher winter conditions have demonstrated what is possible. The Baltic Sea offers a relevant example. Despite a smaller economic footprint and more severe ice conditions, Baltic ports remain active year-round through the use of ice-capable vessels and integrated multimodal infrastructure. There is no reason the Great Lakes, now that the regulatory path has been cleared, should not do the same and make a comparable contribution to North American trade resilience. Unlike coastal gateways, which face sudden disruptions from hurricanes, labor action and infrastructure failures, the risks on the Great Lakes are stable and foreseeable. That reliability offers a competitive advantage for shippers navigating global volatility. But infrastructure alone is not enough. What is required is a shift in mindset. Federal freight policy must treat the Great Lakes as a fully integrated corridor. Carriers need to revisit assumptions about vessel size and routing patterns. Shippers will now be able to prioritize proximity, reliability and carbon performance rather than adhering to legacy paths shaped by outdated restrictions. The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base. Supporting inland container movement by vessel can drive demand for US-built ships, sustain skilled shipyard jobs, and expand the national maritime workforce. This is not just a logistics upgrade. It is a long-term investment in national capacity, employment, and competitiveness. This is a practical opportunity to enhance the national freight system using inland infrastructure that is efficient, cost-effective and underutilized. Monroe stands ready to serve shippers, carriers and policymakers seeking flexible, durable solutions. The Great Lakes have always had the potential to support containerized trade. Now that the path is open, the Port of Monroe is prepared to deliver. Capt. Paul C. LaMarre III is also director of the Port of Monroe in Michigan. Contact him at plamarre@portofmonroe.com .

Supply chain

Marine terminals

Ro/ro cargo

Port infrastructure

Michigan inland port offers new option for Great Lakes containerized freight

 Actual capacity

{name} 
{valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')}

Planned capacity

Blanked capacity

eeSea collects and centralizes liner network data from dozens of public sources including carriers’ vessel tracking portals, long-term schedules, customer advisories, port and terminal operator schedules, and pilot schedules. These disparate datasets are continually inspected, cleaned, and carefully structured. eeSea synthesizes this refined public data with AIS positions from a third-party provider and its datasets spanning schedule reliability, transit times, trade capacity evolution, and 60-day vessel forecasts. Capacity is measured based on the last load port in Asia [eeSea](https://www.eesea.com)

Asia to US West Coast container capacity (eeSea)

Asia to US West Coast container capacity(eeSea)

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.</div>

Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.

<div class="phx-topic">Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-deal-would-trigger-unnecessary-wave-of-rail-mergers-cpkc-6069870">C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation</a> as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. <h3>Political football </h3>While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trump-move-to-oust-stbs-primus-boosts-likelihood-of-up-ns-approval-6070952">fire board member</a> Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. Political football While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to fire board member Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Rail News

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday. </div>

Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday.

<div class="phx-topic">The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200 to $300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,300-$1,400 per FEU.Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-project-big-year-over-year-import-declines-to-close-out-2025-6060323">weak forecasts for year-end volumes</a>. But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/toll-of-us-tariffs-begins-to-emerge-on-unsettled-trans-pacific-6065761">volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading</a>, the potential for a late-year surge, and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/niche-carriers-plan-to-ride-out-declining-spot-rates-on-the-trans-pacific-6071722">niche carriers sticking to the trade</a> have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. <h3>More capacity coming in October </h3>Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d0dc514b-60a6-4b10-862a-081c37b36db2"></dynamic-object></div>If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.”<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="98a0037a-3658-44f2-86a3-be3148b993eb"></dynamic-object></div>Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report. </div>

The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200 to $300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,300-$1,400 per FEU. Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and weak forecasts for year-end volumes . But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading , the potential for a late-year surge, and niche carriers sticking to the trade have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. More capacity coming in October Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.” Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report.

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal. </div>

The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal.

<div class="phx-topic">DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence.The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-29/dp-world-vies-for-deal-to-run-montreal-port-championed-by-carney">confirmed to Bloomberg</a> that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/quebec-provides-new-funding-for-proposed-montreal-terminal-citing-us-trade-tensions-5947783">Contrecoeur project has received</a> C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/carney-has-fresh-opportunity-to-galvanize-canadian-shipping-industry-6047928">newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory</a> approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-relaunches-search-process-for-contrecoeur-terminal-operator-5204826">sent bid invitations</a> to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal.Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence. The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, confirmed to Bloomberg that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the Contrecoeur project has received C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 sent bid invitations to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal. Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com .

Port News

DP World aims to run Carney-backed Montreal terminal

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!

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

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code ESSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

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

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED

Use code ESSW595 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

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code ESSGW995 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

In today’s competitive logistical landscape, efficiency is an absolute necessity for smooth operations. Yet, in the barge sector, many operators still rely on fragmented systems, delayed updates, and manual tracking methods that slow decision-making and increase operational risk. OpenTug’s new eBook, How Enhanced Visibility Transforms Barge Operations, reveals how unified, real-time data can become your competitive advantage leading to improved voyage management and more actionable insights. Drawing on industry best practices and real-world examples, it explores how operational transparency empowers teams to: ●	Reduce delays with accurate ETAs and proactive scheduling decisions ●	Improve asset utilization by identifying underused equipment and optimizing cargos ●	Strengthen safety and compliance through consistent, accessible documentation and reporting ●	Boost customer satisfaction with transparent status updates and faster response time You’ll learn how visibility can connect every part of your operation into a single, actionable view. The ability to see and act on real-time information transforms the way you plan, execute, and deliver. From managing a small regional fleet to running a large, national operation, this eBook will help you understand the measurable benefits of enhanced visibility and how technology like BargeOS is transforming the way barge logistics is managed. Get your copy today and see how clear insights lead to stronger performance, smarter decisions, and more profitable operations. <a href="https://9315820.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/9315820/eBook/Nav-theFuture-AJW-08.19.25.pdf" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">Click here</a><span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-16_9 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-small" data-figure-size="small" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="16:9"><img src="/content-assets/1756152344211_Opentug%20logo.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">

Opentug11.png

Transform Barge Operations with Total Visibility

At SSA Marine Mexico, we firmly believe that business development must go hand in hand with social and environmental well-being. Our vision is not solely focused on operating efficiently, but also on creating a meaningful and positive impact in the communities where we are present. Since 1995, we have reaffirmed this commitment through tangible actions that reflect our core values of responsibility, solidarity, and sustainability. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584535914_Photo%201.jpg" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> A Year of Major Achievements Over the past year, we allocated more than $107,000 USD to the implementation of 60 social and environmental projects, positively impacting over 7,800 people across various regions of Mexico. Each initiative was designed with a holistic approach, addressing key areas that contribute to long-term community development. Education: Laying the Foundation for the Future Education is one of the most powerful tools to promote social mobility and equitable development. At SSA Marine Mexico, we support academic initiatives that inspire and empower the next generation of leaders. One of our most impactful partnerships was with the University of Colima, where we sponsored the “Reto Camp” program. This initiative encourages university students to develop innovative solutions in the fields of sustainability, logistics, and port operations, offering them mentorship, tools, and real-world challenges to solve. In addition, we donated microscopes, school supplies, and educational materials to institutions in underserved communities, helping to improve the learning environment and provide students with the resources they need to succeed. Health and Sports: Promoting Wellness We believe that healthy communities are strong communities. We have supported several local sporting events and provided direct assistance to talented athletes, enabling them to pursue their passions and represent their regions with pride. Beyond sports, we also strengthened our collaboration with critical emergency response organizations such as the Mexican Red Cross and Civil Protection. Our contributions helped enhance their readiness and capabilities in times of crisis, ensuring better outcomes for those affected by emergencies. Supporting Vulnerable Groups: Reaching Those Who Need It Most A core part of our social responsibility efforts is directed toward supporting vulnerable populations. We have contributed to a range of initiatives focused on children, migrants, and at-risk families. These efforts included donations to orphanages and shelters, as well as support for the National Institute of Migration and grassroots organizations dedicated to protecting and empowering people facing adversity. By standing with those in need, we reinforce our commitment to inclusion and social justice, values that are central to our identity as a responsible company. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584944645_Photo%202.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">Culture: Strengthening Community Identity Cultural identity is a key element in building resilient and united communities. At SSA Marine Mexico, we actively participate in the organization and sponsorship of cultural events that celebrate local traditions and foster civic pride. Working alongside port authorities and municipal governments, we helped bring music, art, and heritage to the forefront, creating spaces for community engagement and intercultural dialogue. Environment: Investing in the Planet Our commitment to sustainability goes beyond operations—it’s a philosophy that drives every decision we make. We have partnered with environmental institutions to carry out reforestation campaigns, beach cleanups, and conservation efforts. In collaboration with the Institute for the Environment, we supported initiatives aimed at decarbonization, biodiversity protection, and environmental education. By involving our employees and local volunteers in these actions, we also foster a culture of environmental stewardship throughout our organization and our surrounding communities. Innovation for a Sustainable Future Sustainability is not just about doing good—it’s also about doing things better. In 2024, we invested $22 million USD in the acquisition of 11 state-of-the-art E-RTG cranes. These electric rubber-tired gantry cranes represent a significant technological advancement in port equipment. Seven of them are already operating on clean electric energy, resulting in a reduction of nearly 4,000 tons of CO₂ emissions and improving operational efficiency by 7%. The remaining four cranes are fully compatible with future electrification, underscoring our long-term strategy to modernize our operations in an environmentally responsible way. This investment is part of a broader innovation roadmap that includes digitalization, automation, and cleaner energy sources—all designed to ensure that our ports continue to grow without compromising the health of our planet. Building a Better Tomorrow, Together At SSA Marine Mexico, we understand that sustainability is a shared and ongoing responsibility. True impact requires collaboration across sectors, long-term vision, and unwavering commitment. That is why we continue to work hand-in-hand with local authorities, non-profit organizations, universities, and our own employees to create solutions that are both scalable and sustainable. Our journey is far from over. In the years ahead, we will continue to deepen our community engagement, explore cleaner technologies, and strengthen the social fabric of the regions where we operate. Each initiative, no matter the size, is a step toward building a future where business success goes hand-in-hand with human and environmental prosperity. We are proud of what we have achieved in 2024, but we are even more excited about what lies ahead. SSA Marine Mexico — Moving the World, Caring for People and Planet. LINK: <a href="https://www.ssamarine.mx/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">https://www.ssamarine.mx/</a>

Photo 2.png

SSA Marine Mexico: True Commitment to Sustainability

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

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


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

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

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

Upgrade Subscription

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Container lines offering regular calls at India’s busiest port have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic.</div>

Container lines offering regular calls at India’s busiest port have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic.

<div class="phx-topic">Mundra Port — India’s busiest container handler — is grappling with major harbor congestion that has severely disrupted the flow of cargo to and from northern hinterlands by rail. Rail freight accounts for a significant portion of box volumes handled by Mundra, with northern inland container depots contributing the most. Container lines offering regular calls at Mundra have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic. “Due to congestion, train movement towards Mundra Port is currently disrupted,” Maersk said in a customer advisory. “This is affecting the timely placement of export trains at the port and, consequently, causing delays in the evacuation of import containers.” The import backlogs have choked rail yards, complicating the typically followed first-in, first-out model of train operations, sources said. Concerns among local supply chain stakeholders are growing, with freight depot service leader Gateway Distriparks (GDL) sending out a trade advisory to customers. “Train movement towards the port [Mundra] is currently sluggish,” GDL noted. “We are in regular touch with Indian Railways to expedite train movement.” Officials at India’s Association of Container Train Operators (ACTO) who spoke with the Journal of Commerce have attributed the rail slowdowns to chronic capacity pressure at Mundra stemming from landside infrastructure gaps amid steady trade growth. “There is a critical need for port rail capacity to increase with more handling lines and evacuation capacity in order to deal with the growing volumes,” said ACTO President Manish Puri. “This is the only long-term solution, otherwise congestion will keep occurring whenever there is even a minor volume peak or other operational hiccup due to external factors.” <h3>Terminals, train operators at odds </h3>As shippers face additional cost implications, a blame game over the cargo buildups appears to be at play between port terminals and container train operators (CTOs), including state-owned giant Container Corporation of India. “We are not denying the increased pressure from import surges, but CTOs stick to their normal business approach on the export leg — wait until trains are completely full to dispatch,” said a port executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sunil Vaswani, executive director of the Container Shipping Lines’ Association (India), said the issue needs fixing between terminals and CTOs, adding that a shortage of truck drivers linked to the festive season and lingering vessel bunching cases have exacerbated the problem. Mundra is equipped to handle up to 30 trains a day, generally railing out between 5,000 TEUs to 6,000 TEUs daily. But the normal inventory of import containers landing into its yards is in the range of 15,000 TEUs, which sources said has peaked at 20,000 TEUs in recent days. Mundra — Adani Ports’ flagship port entity — features five box terminals, which have had 90%-plus utilization of existing capacity levels for some time because of strong cargo growth. But the pace of volumes passing through rival Nhava Sheva Port has ticked noticeably higher over the past few months following the recent launch of Phase II operations by concessionaire PSA International, pushing overall port capacity to about 10 million TEUs. The latest port data reflects that altering regional trend. April–August volumes at Nhava Sheva were up 13% year over year to 3.3 million TEUs, while Mundra remained relatively flat at 3.5 million TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>.</div>

Mundra Port — India’s busiest container handler — is grappling with major harbor congestion that has severely disrupted the flow of cargo to and from northern hinterlands by rail. Rail freight accounts for a significant portion of box volumes handled by Mundra, with northern inland container depots contributing the most. Container lines offering regular calls at Mundra have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic. “Due to congestion, train movement towards Mundra Port is currently disrupted,” Maersk said in a customer advisory. “This is affecting the timely placement of export trains at the port and, consequently, causing delays in the evacuation of import containers.” The import backlogs have choked rail yards, complicating the typically followed first-in, first-out model of train operations, sources said. Concerns among local supply chain stakeholders are growing, with freight depot service leader Gateway Distriparks (GDL) sending out a trade advisory to customers. “Train movement towards the port [Mundra] is currently sluggish,” GDL noted. “We are in regular touch with Indian Railways to expedite train movement.” Officials at India’s Association of Container Train Operators (ACTO) who spoke with the Journal of Commerce have attributed the rail slowdowns to chronic capacity pressure at Mundra stemming from landside infrastructure gaps amid steady trade growth. “There is a critical need for port rail capacity to increase with more handling lines and evacuation capacity in order to deal with the growing volumes,” said ACTO President Manish Puri. “This is the only long-term solution, otherwise congestion will keep occurring whenever there is even a minor volume peak or other operational hiccup due to external factors.” Terminals, train operators at odds As shippers face additional cost implications, a blame game over the cargo buildups appears to be at play between port terminals and container train operators (CTOs), including state-owned giant Container Corporation of India. “We are not denying the increased pressure from import surges, but CTOs stick to their normal business approach on the export leg — wait until trains are completely full to dispatch,” said a port executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sunil Vaswani, executive director of the Container Shipping Lines’ Association (India), said the issue needs fixing between terminals and CTOs, adding that a shortage of truck drivers linked to the festive season and lingering vessel bunching cases have exacerbated the problem. Mundra is equipped to handle up to 30 trains a day, generally railing out between 5,000 TEUs to 6,000 TEUs daily. But the normal inventory of import containers landing into its yards is in the range of 15,000 TEUs, which sources said has peaked at 20,000 TEUs in recent days. Mundra — Adani Ports’ flagship port entity — features five box terminals, which have had 90%-plus utilization of existing capacity levels for some time because of strong cargo growth. But the pace of volumes passing through rival Nhava Sheva Port has ticked noticeably higher over the past few months following the recent launch of Phase II operations by concessionaire PSA International, pushing overall port capacity to about 10 million TEUs. The latest port data reflects that altering regional trend. April–August volumes at Nhava Sheva were up 13% year over year to 3.3 million TEUs, while Mundra remained relatively flat at 3.5 million TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

International ports

Congestion choking Mundra Port threatens North India cargo flow

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Suspension of the Pacific South 5 service comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US in an attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week.</div>

Suspension of the Pacific South 5 service comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US in an attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week.

<div class="phx-topic">The Premier Alliance said Friday it is suspending its express Pacific South 5 service between eastern China and the US West Coast after only four months amid a drop in demand on the eastbound trans-Pacific. The move is the latest sign that bookings before an annual holiday slowdown in Chinese production are weaker than usual, presenting a challenge to carriers trying to stem a container spot rate bleed. Alliance members Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming gave no reason for the change in separate customer advisories, but it is possible the fall in trans-Pacific volumes amid US tariff uncertainty did not justify an express loop. The service provided a transit time of 14 days from Ningbo to Long Beach and 17 days from Qingdao to Long Beach. Instead, the Premier Alliance carriers announced additional port calls on four other trans-Pacific services. These comprise Ningbo on its PS4 service, Qingdao on the PS6 service, Pusan on the Far East Pacific North 2 and Norfolk on the US East Coast 2 services. The PS5 service was launched in June, but the carriers said the last sailing was by the 4,888 TEU NYK Constellation that left Qingdao Sept. 1 and was due to arrive at Ningbo Friday. The suspension comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US as they attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week, which begins Oct. 1. Carriers are blanking at least five sailings this week compared to two last week and two in the week before, sources confirmed. “Blank sailing activity to the East Coast is moderate now,” James Caradonna, executive vice president of the forwarder Spedag America, told the Journal of Commerce. Several sources said they expect blanking to pick up further as Golden Week approaches. <h3>Carriers try to recoup losses </h3>The next four weeks offer container lines what is likely their last shot this year to claw back at least some of the recent decline in rates. Starting Oct. 1, Chinese factories will close for eight days for Golden Week. The industry is split on whether there is any boost in cargo on the way, with forwarders seeing little signs of late-year traffic gains and a few carriers saying they are hopeful. One carrier executive said retailers should be incentivized to ship what they can this month before the Golden Week holiday. During the second half of August, bookings for Chinese shipments into the US were down nearly 33% from the same time last year, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun &amp; Bradstreet. Even as carriers take more functional capacity out of the market through blank sailings, there is still plenty of slot availability, according to multiple forwarder notices seen by the Journal of Commerce. In September, carriers are blanking almost 15% of capacity into the East and Gulf coasts, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Container spot rates to both coasts have been climbing since Aug. 22, according to various indices, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange measuring a 33.1% increase on US West Coast routing, to $2,189 per FEU over the past two weeks. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200-$300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,600 per FEU. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="da1b20b1-3e87-4d61-b13f-10e2633dce91"></dynamic-object></div>Several forwarders said they are already seeing some reductions to the latest general rate increase (GRI) implemented Sept. 1. ”We’ve got notifications from carriers already starting to pull the rate down — only like $100 to $200,” said a freight forwarder. “It’s not a huge drop, but we’re only four days in, [and] already seeing some rate reductions.” “Given the lack of volume surge prior to Golden Week, these rate increases are unlikely to stick in full and, at best, will allow the carriers to maintain rate levels,” Sanjay Tejwani, CEO of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “This behavior will continue as we get into [the fourth quarter] when the volume decline will be more pronounced [than the third quarter.]” September bookings so far are lower than last year, said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of the forwarder FreightRight Global Logistics. “It doesn’t look good to me. If there is any tightness, it is probably going to be because of the blank sailings,” he said. Overall, another forwarder said, most shippers are not in a hurry to book their shipments, especially with the rate increases. ”The shipper has the power in that sense,” the source said. “At some point they’re [going to realize they] don’t have any inventory. But in the meantime, nobody’s in a hurry.” The US head at a major carrier confirmed blank announcements are encouraging some bookings but noted “bookings are much slower than usual” during the lead-up to Golden Week. <h3>Plentiful capacity </h3>Some container lines are optimistic that demand will rise ahead of Golden Week and that demand for the rest of the year may be stronger than expected. With US inventories low, there is room for restocking even with tariffs, while US durable goods consumption continues to expand, carriers note. “I think what we’re hearing from customers is yes, they frontloaded their volumes, but US consumer demand has probably also exceeded expectations,” Michael Britton, head of North American markets for ocean products at Maersk, told the Journal of Commerce. But Britton acknowledged it was likely that Maersk would have to blank some sailings ahead of Golden Week and could trim services such as the TP9 launched in June if demand weakens more than anticipated. ”[Rates are elevated] because of pre-Golden Week push,” said another carrier source. “We also have had some blanks, so some cargo is being rolled, and our [utilization] is closer to 90%, so it will keep the spot rate at the higher level.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="f0d3021d-c84d-4556-9f93-72c0f6230a17"></dynamic-object></div>The source said their elevated utilization had helped support rates, which is why they have not lowered their rates like some other carriers. ”If [utilization] gets to 50% or 60%, then we will start seeing drops,” the source said. “Maybe by the end of the month.” Carriers are already announcing blank sailings for October, which will further constrict capacity. “There will be heavy blanks through mid-October,” the first carrier executive said. “In the final week of October, they’ll be reinstated.” Forwarders say that although most of the alliance carriers this week are attempting to stand firm on the Sept. 1 GRIs, space is plentiful and importers have access to special rates that could begin to erode the posted rates by mid-month. “There is no problem getting space — across the board. Carriers are in a bit of a pickle,” said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to non-vessel-operating common carriers. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. Special Correspondent Keith Wallis contributed to this report. </div>

The Premier Alliance said Friday it is suspending its express Pacific South 5 service between eastern China and the US West Coast after only four months amid a drop in demand on the eastbound trans-Pacific. The move is the latest sign that bookings before an annual holiday slowdown in Chinese production are weaker than usual, presenting a challenge to carriers trying to stem a container spot rate bleed. Alliance members Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming gave no reason for the change in separate customer advisories, but it is possible the fall in trans-Pacific volumes amid US tariff uncertainty did not justify an express loop. The service provided a transit time of 14 days from Ningbo to Long Beach and 17 days from Qingdao to Long Beach. Instead, the Premier Alliance carriers announced additional port calls on four other trans-Pacific services. These comprise Ningbo on its PS4 service, Qingdao on the PS6 service, Pusan on the Far East Pacific North 2 and Norfolk on the US East Coast 2 services. The PS5 service was launched in June, but the carriers said the last sailing was by the 4,888 TEU NYK Constellation that left Qingdao Sept. 1 and was due to arrive at Ningbo Friday. The suspension comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US as they attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week, which begins Oct. 1. Carriers are blanking at least five sailings this week compared to two last week and two in the week before, sources confirmed. “Blank sailing activity to the East Coast is moderate now,” James Caradonna, executive vice president of the forwarder Spedag America, told the Journal of Commerce. Several sources said they expect blanking to pick up further as Golden Week approaches. Carriers try to recoup losses The next four weeks offer container lines what is likely their last shot this year to claw back at least some of the recent decline in rates. Starting Oct. 1, Chinese factories will close for eight days for Golden Week. The industry is split on whether there is any boost in cargo on the way, with forwarders seeing little signs of late-year traffic gains and a few carriers saying they are hopeful. One carrier executive said retailers should be incentivized to ship what they can this month before the Golden Week holiday. During the second half of August, bookings for Chinese shipments into the US were down nearly 33% from the same time last year, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun & Bradstreet. Even as carriers take more functional capacity out of the market through blank sailings, there is still plenty of slot availability, according to multiple forwarder notices seen by the Journal of Commerce. In September, carriers are blanking almost 15% of capacity into the East and Gulf coasts, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Container spot rates to both coasts have been climbing since Aug. 22, according to various indices, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange measuring a 33.1% increase on US West Coast routing, to $2,189 per FEU over the past two weeks. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200-$300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,600 per FEU. Several forwarders said they are already seeing some reductions to the latest general rate increase (GRI) implemented Sept. 1. ”We’ve got notifications from carriers already starting to pull the rate down — only like $100 to $200,” said a freight forwarder. “It’s not a huge drop, but we’re only four days in, [and] already seeing some rate reductions.” “Given the lack of volume surge prior to Golden Week, these rate increases are unlikely to stick in full and, at best, will allow the carriers to maintain rate levels,” Sanjay Tejwani, CEO of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “This behavior will continue as we get into [the fourth quarter] when the volume decline will be more pronounced [than the third quarter.]” September bookings so far are lower than last year, said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of the forwarder FreightRight Global Logistics. “It doesn’t look good to me. If there is any tightness, it is probably going to be because of the blank sailings,” he said. Overall, another forwarder said, most shippers are not in a hurry to book their shipments, especially with the rate increases. ”The shipper has the power in that sense,” the source said. “At some point they’re [going to realize they] don’t have any inventory. But in the meantime, nobody’s in a hurry.” The US head at a major carrier confirmed blank announcements are encouraging some bookings but noted “bookings are much slower than usual” during the lead-up to Golden Week. Plentiful capacity Some container lines are optimistic that demand will rise ahead of Golden Week and that demand for the rest of the year may be stronger than expected. With US inventories low, there is room for restocking even with tariffs, while US durable goods consumption continues to expand, carriers note. “I think what we’re hearing from customers is yes, they frontloaded their volumes, but US consumer demand has probably also exceeded expectations,” Michael Britton, head of North American markets for ocean products at Maersk, told the Journal of Commerce. But Britton acknowledged it was likely that Maersk would have to blank some sailings ahead of Golden Week and could trim services such as the TP9 launched in June if demand weakens more than anticipated. ”[Rates are elevated] because of pre-Golden Week push,” said another carrier source. “We also have had some blanks, so some cargo is being rolled, and our [utilization] is closer to 90%, so it will keep the spot rate at the higher level.” The source said their elevated utilization had helped support rates, which is why they have not lowered their rates like some other carriers. ”If [utilization] gets to 50% or 60%, then we will start seeing drops,” the source said. “Maybe by the end of the month.” Carriers are already announcing blank sailings for October, which will further constrict capacity. “There will be heavy blanks through mid-October,” the first carrier executive said. “In the final week of October, they’ll be reinstated.” Forwarders say that although most of the alliance carriers this week are attempting to stand firm on the Sept. 1 GRIs, space is plentiful and importers have access to special rates that could begin to erode the posted rates by mid-month. “There is no problem getting space — across the board. Carriers are in a bit of a pickle,” said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to non-vessel-operating common carriers. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com . Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com . Special Correspondent Keith Wallis contributed to this report.

Premier Alliance service halt latest sign of trans-Pacific demand downturn

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The smooth flow of containers is an improvement from the near gridlock of four years ago during the COVID-linked volume surge and the elevated dwell times during last year’s peak season, progress trucking companies say they have noticed.</div>

The smooth flow of containers is an improvement from the near gridlock of four years ago during the COVID-linked volume surge and the elevated dwell times during last year’s peak season, progress trucking companies say they have noticed.

<div class="phx-topic">Western US railroads BNSF and Union Pacific (UP) largely kept ocean containers flowing smoothly in August through the key hubs of Chicago, Dallas, Kansas City and Memphis as Southern California’s July import surge moved inland, according to data and market participants. That’s an improvement from the near gridlock of four years ago during the COVID-linked volume surge and the elevated dwell times during last year’s peak season, progress trucking companies say they have noticed. Chassis were easy to find in inland cities and overall turn times for drivers were manageable, truckers say. “Surprisingly, everything's been relatively smooth,” Paul Brashier, vice president of global logistics for ITS Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “The ports were busy in July. Then the cargo moved inland in August, and for the most part, the ecosystem handled it fine. The freight is flowing relatively well.” Some truck drivers have faced longer waits at UP’s Global IV terminal in Joliet, Ill., and at Norfolk Southern’s Landers terminal in Chicago, but those delays have been sporadic and predated the recent uptick in international intermodal traffic. BNSF’s <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bad-weather-early-peak-demand-slowed-bnsf-trains-last-month-6074860">train speeds slowed</a> in August, but the railroad attributed that to flash flooding near Amarillo, Texas, and extreme heat in California’s Mojave Desert. While the bad weather extended transit times, it did not create congestion inside terminals. The Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA) reported that the average rail container dwell in Los Angeles and Long Beach in July was 5.18 days, down from 5.66 days a year earlier. August figures are expected in the coming weeks. Last year, rail dwells jumped to 8.2 days in August, 9.25 days in September and 9.86 days in October. Mike Jacob, president of the PMSA, doesn’t expect that to happen this year. "We really don't see a lot out there that's going to be super-challenging," Jacob told the Journal of Commerce. “[Railroads are] as good as or even better than last year. … The railroads were making sure they weren't leaving anything on the docks. The total structural performance versus the pandemic is like night and day.” Marine terminal executives in Los Angeles and Long Beach offered a similar view, saying railcar supply and service have been solid since early August. At Yusen Terminals, where dwell times swelled to more than 10 days last August and September, conditions appear unlikely to repeat, according to Yusen President Alan McCorkle. <h3>Rails cite investment </h3>UP’s service metrics have held up better during this peak season so far than in the last two. In the final week of August, its average intermodal train speeds ranked in the 96th percentile of all weeks since 2017, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of US Surface Transportation Board data. The number of intermodal trains held in route was likewise lower than in 96% of weeks over that span, even as the number of loaded railcars idling for more than 48 hours was the highest for the month of August in three years. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="cffd049d-9f51-41dc-be55-f79bcf5d15a5"></dynamic-object></div>Nevertheless, UP’s Intermodal Service Z-Score, a Journal of Commerce metric focused on how a railroad performs against its own historical norms, has stayed positive during this peak season thus far, a contrast to 2023 and 2024 when the score flipped negative during the peak months. “Union Pacific has invested $1.4 billion in our intermodal terminals since 2020, opening four new terminals,” said Robynn Tysver, a spokesperson for UP. “Investment in technology has been a game changer at intermodal terminals, notably the new gate technology that gives drivers a seamless, efficient experience in-gating and out-gating, helping us to deliver a strong and reliable service to the market.” BNSF has zeroed in on Memphis this summer, where drivers have lodged more complaints than at its hubs in Chicago, Kansas City and Fort Worth. In response, the railroad deployed a resource team to Memphis to monitor wait times in real time and coordinate with drivers and crane operators to move boxes faster. Jon Gabriel, BNSF’s group vice president of consumer products, said the effort has already paid off. “Our driver average turn time has come down about 30% since this summer,” Gabriel said. “This dedicated resource (in Memphis), strictly focused on driver throughput and the driver experience, has made a big difference. It was a pilot program, but it’s been very successful. If need be, we’ll certainly look to scale it elsewhere in our network.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a> and Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Western US railroads BNSF and Union Pacific (UP) largely kept ocean containers flowing smoothly in August through the key hubs of Chicago, Dallas, Kansas City and Memphis as Southern California’s July import surge moved inland, according to data and market participants. That’s an improvement from the near gridlock of four years ago during the COVID-linked volume surge and the elevated dwell times during last year’s peak season, progress trucking companies say they have noticed. Chassis were easy to find in inland cities and overall turn times for drivers were manageable, truckers say. “Surprisingly, everything's been relatively smooth,” Paul Brashier, vice president of global logistics for ITS Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “The ports were busy in July. Then the cargo moved inland in August, and for the most part, the ecosystem handled it fine. The freight is flowing relatively well.” Some truck drivers have faced longer waits at UP’s Global IV terminal in Joliet, Ill., and at Norfolk Southern’s Landers terminal in Chicago, but those delays have been sporadic and predated the recent uptick in international intermodal traffic. BNSF’s train speeds slowed in August, but the railroad attributed that to flash flooding near Amarillo, Texas, and extreme heat in California’s Mojave Desert. While the bad weather extended transit times, it did not create congestion inside terminals. The Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA) reported that the average rail container dwell in Los Angeles and Long Beach in July was 5.18 days, down from 5.66 days a year earlier. August figures are expected in the coming weeks. Last year, rail dwells jumped to 8.2 days in August, 9.25 days in September and 9.86 days in October. Mike Jacob, president of the PMSA, doesn’t expect that to happen this year. "We really don't see a lot out there that's going to be super-challenging," Jacob told the Journal of Commerce. “[Railroads are] as good as or even better than last year. … The railroads were making sure they weren't leaving anything on the docks. The total structural performance versus the pandemic is like night and day.” Marine terminal executives in Los Angeles and Long Beach offered a similar view, saying railcar supply and service have been solid since early August. At Yusen Terminals, where dwell times swelled to more than 10 days last August and September, conditions appear unlikely to repeat, according to Yusen President Alan McCorkle. Rails cite investment UP’s service metrics have held up better during this peak season so far than in the last two. In the final week of August, its average intermodal train speeds ranked in the 96th percentile of all weeks since 2017, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of US Surface Transportation Board data. The number of intermodal trains held in route was likewise lower than in 96% of weeks over that span, even as the number of loaded railcars idling for more than 48 hours was the highest for the month of August in three years. Nevertheless, UP’s Intermodal Service Z-Score, a Journal of Commerce metric focused on how a railroad performs against its own historical norms, has stayed positive during this peak season thus far, a contrast to 2023 and 2024 when the score flipped negative during the peak months. “Union Pacific has invested $1.4 billion in our intermodal terminals since 2020, opening four new terminals,” said Robynn Tysver, a spokesperson for UP. “Investment in technology has been a game changer at intermodal terminals, notably the new gate technology that gives drivers a seamless, efficient experience in-gating and out-gating, helping us to deliver a strong and reliable service to the market.” BNSF has zeroed in on Memphis this summer, where drivers have lodged more complaints than at its hubs in Chicago, Kansas City and Fort Worth. In response, the railroad deployed a resource team to Memphis to monitor wait times in real time and coordinate with drivers and crane operators to move boxes faster. Jon Gabriel, BNSF’s group vice president of consumer products, said the effort has already paid off. “Our driver average turn time has come down about 30% since this summer,” Gabriel said. “This dedicated resource (in Memphis), strictly focused on driver throughput and the driver experience, has made a big difference. It was a pilot program, but it’s been very successful. If need be, we’ll certainly look to scale it elsewhere in our network.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com and Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

CMA CGM reroutes China-built ships to avoid US port fees

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point

DP World aims to run Carney-backed Montreal terminal

Recent Commentary

Ocean carriers are not helpless when it comes to managing capacity

Michigan inland port offers new option for Great Lakes containerized freight

Top 5 Most Read Stories