<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Despite its brevity, shippers can expect to see ongoing impacts on tonnage supply on some trade lanes from the Oct. 1-3 strike, Lars Jensen told the South Carolina International Trade Conference.</div>

Despite its brevity, shippers can expect to see ongoing impacts on tonnage supply on some trade lanes from the Oct. 1-3 strike, Lars Jensen told the South Carolina International Trade Conference.

Feature image

<div>The three-day strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf coast ports earlier this month will bring a delayed reduction in capacity on some trade lanes and could affect cargo frontloading ahead of another potential work stoppage in January, container shipping analyst Lars Jensen said Thursday.Despite its brevity, shippers can expect to see ongoing impacts on tonnage supply on some trade lanes from the <a>Oct. 1-3 strike</a>, Jensen, CEO of Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce analyst, told the South Carolina International Trade Conference. “A three-day strike doesn’t sound like much but that doesn’t mean it’s over,” Jensen said. “The...

The three-day strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf coast ports earlier this month will bring a delayed reduction in capacity on some trade lanes and could affect cargo frontloading ahead of another potential work stoppage in January, container shipping analyst Lars Jensen said Thursday. Despite its brevity, shippers can expect to see ongoing impacts on tonnage supply on some trade lanes from the Oct. 1-3 strike , Jensen, CEO of Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce analyst, told the South Carolina International Trade Conference. “A three-day strike doesn’t sound like much but that doesn’t mean it’s over,” Jensen said. “The regular cost from just a three-day strike is going to be with us at least until the middle of November. Some of the ripple effects are only just now beginning to show themselves.” According to data from Vespucci Maritime presented by Jensen, the Asia to US East Coast trade lane will see an approximate 17% drop in capacity in week 46, which begins Nov. 11. If the strike had lasted a week, that drop would have been about 40%. For trans-Atlantic shipments from Northern Europe, capacity will drop by about 10% in week 42 – the current week – and recover slightly before dropping again by 15% in week 44, said Jensen. Two weeks after the stoppage, ships on the trans-Atlantic backhaul trade are delayed for their arrivals to Europe, impacting export capacity, Jensen said. After three to four weeks, Latin America exports will be affected, with Asia exports impacted after five to six weeks, he said. “These are simply dominoes that have fallen,” Jensen said. “Every time we have a problem somewhere in the world, this percolates through the system for months.” Carriers have expressed similar concerns related to equipment availability and schedule impacts. “The strike and [the] slow steaming around the Cape of Good Hope requires such an investment in assets so you have enough containers to get back to handle both sides of the ocean,” Stuart Sandlin, president of Hapag Lloyd/North America said during the South Carolina conference. “These disruptions really throw a kink in that supply chain ... That, for us as a carrier, is the worst scenario. Now, I have my ship, my $320 million asset, but there’s nothing to load because I don’t have the containers there.” Jensen, in a recent Journal of Commerce commentary , previously identified mid-November as a tipping point — when the operational effects from the October strike could begin to fade at the same time supply chain concerns renew ahead of the Jan. 15 deadline for the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) to reach a formal deal on a new master contract. If that contract isn’t agreed on soon, Jensen predicts another surge of cargo to the US ahead of the next potential labor disruption, further straining available capacity. The surge would be exacerbated if Donald Trump wins the November presidential election, bringing with it a threat of potential tariffs that would further drive volumes before Trump would take office in January. ”Again, working backwards, that would mean a surge in export cargo out of Asia,” Jensen said. “Just like when we had an early peak season [in the US] in the summer, we’re going to have an early peak season ahead of [Lunar New Year.]” Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .

Maritime

Port News

Supply chain

Container Shipping News

Ripple effects playing out globally from ILA strike: analyst

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">An FMC judge ruled the carrier committed several violations of US shipping law, including unreasonable practices, failure to meet service commitments, and refusal to deal with the now-bankrupt retailer between 2020-2022.</div>

An FMC judge ruled the carrier committed several violations of US shipping law, including unreasonable practices, failure to meet service commitments, and refusal to deal with the now-bankrupt retailer between 2020-2022.

<div class="phx-topic">OOCL has been ordered to pay over $45 million to bankrupt retailer Bed Bath and Beyond after an administrative law judge ruled the carrier engaged in a pandemic-era practice of refusing the company’s contract cargo in favor of spot bookings and later retaliated against the shipper. In a decision published last week, an ALJ for the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) ruled that OOCL committed several violations of US shipping law, including unreasonable practices, failure to meet service commitments, and refusal to deal with Bed Bath and Beyond between 2020-2022. The retailer, which went bankrupt in 2023, filed a slew of complaints that same year against <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bed-bath-beyond-looks-to-recoup-millions-from-oocl-in-fmc-complaint-5192741">OOCL</a>, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bed-bath-beyond-files-fmc-complaint-against-yang-ming-in-capacity-dispute-5220648">Yang Ming</a>, HMM, Evergreen Marine, CMA CGM, and Mediterranean Shipping Co., alleging the carriers failed to meet service contract commitments during the COVID-19 pandemic and instead pushed Bed Bath and Beyond’s freight to higher-priced spot bookings. MSC and Bed Bath and Beyond settled their dispute in March. The other cases are still pending. In the OOCL case, the first one filed, the judge found that container bookings Bed Bath and Beyond made with the carrier had to go through OOCL’s internal yield-management software, which allocated space based on revenue and not on the already agreed service contracts. The software would routinely refuse a booking or keep it pending indefinitely with no confirmation, according to the ALJ’s decision, adding that in the case of Bed Bath and Beyond, it would make multiple different bookings to reach its allocated volume, only to have the software reject all of them. While there was some ability to override the system, OOCL was so short-staffed during the pandemic that few people had the ability to handle exceptions, according to the decision. “Throughout 2020-2022, OOCL’s own employees complained that the system did not provide sufficient space to meet minimum quantity commitments and did not function properly,” the judge’s decision said. “Moreover, the evidence shows (the software) was not implemented to ensure sufficient space allocations or the efficient flow of cargo. Rather, the system was used to maximize profits.” OOCL tried to defend the allocation limits it put on shippers, arguing that it had less shipping capacity during the pandemic. However, the judge ruled that US shipping law requires that carriers “must pro-rate their available space among contract shippers as an alternative to possibly acquiring additional capacity.” <h3>Incriminating emails </h3>After multiple complaints from Bed Bath and Beyond about bumped cargo, OOCL offered to put the retailer’s freight on premium services and ad-hoc vessels at higher rates. However, “the extent that these extra loaders created additional capacity, OOCL should have first fulfilled its pre-existing contractual requirements, rather than being utilized only as a premium service or at higher rates,” the judge ruled. Bed Bath and Beyond sent multiple messages to OOCL about its booking practices possibly violating US shipping law. Yet the retailer still sought to negotiate a 2022-2023 contract with the carrier. Instead, the company retaliated and refused to deal, the judge’s decision said. An OOCL executive sent an email that said, “Simple solution is to cut back their bookings, then we will have fewer problems with them. With all the customers who want to expand with us, this one jumped to head of the class for deselection.” Another email from an OOCL executive said, “No need to reach out to Bed Bath &amp; Beyond as our rates are purposely higher than what they will ship against.” The emails were entered into evidence as part of the judge’s review. “The evidence shows that OOCL intentionally quoted a reduced MQC and rates so far above market that they cannot be considered a good faith offer or negotiation,” the judge said. OOCL could not be reached for comment. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

OOCL has been ordered to pay over $45 million to bankrupt retailer Bed Bath and Beyond after an administrative law judge ruled the carrier engaged in a pandemic-era practice of refusing the company’s contract cargo in favor of spot bookings and later retaliated against the shipper. In a decision published last week, an ALJ for the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) ruled that OOCL committed several violations of US shipping law, including unreasonable practices, failure to meet service commitments, and refusal to deal with Bed Bath and Beyond between 2020-2022. The retailer, which went bankrupt in 2023, filed a slew of complaints that same year against OOCL , Yang Ming , HMM, Evergreen Marine, CMA CGM, and Mediterranean Shipping Co., alleging the carriers failed to meet service contract commitments during the COVID-19 pandemic and instead pushed Bed Bath and Beyond’s freight to higher-priced spot bookings. MSC and Bed Bath and Beyond settled their dispute in March. The other cases are still pending. In the OOCL case, the first one filed, the judge found that container bookings Bed Bath and Beyond made with the carrier had to go through OOCL’s internal yield-management software, which allocated space based on revenue and not on the already agreed service contracts. The software would routinely refuse a booking or keep it pending indefinitely with no confirmation, according to the ALJ’s decision, adding that in the case of Bed Bath and Beyond, it would make multiple different bookings to reach its allocated volume, only to have the software reject all of them. While there was some ability to override the system, OOCL was so short-staffed during the pandemic that few people had the ability to handle exceptions, according to the decision. “Throughout 2020-2022, OOCL’s own employees complained that the system did not provide sufficient space to meet minimum quantity commitments and did not function properly,” the judge’s decision said. “Moreover, the evidence shows (the software) was not implemented to ensure sufficient space allocations or the efficient flow of cargo. Rather, the system was used to maximize profits.” OOCL tried to defend the allocation limits it put on shippers, arguing that it had less shipping capacity during the pandemic. However, the judge ruled that US shipping law requires that carriers “must pro-rate their available space among contract shippers as an alternative to possibly acquiring additional capacity.” Incriminating emails After multiple complaints from Bed Bath and Beyond about bumped cargo, OOCL offered to put the retailer’s freight on premium services and ad-hoc vessels at higher rates. However, “the extent that these extra loaders created additional capacity, OOCL should have first fulfilled its pre-existing contractual requirements, rather than being utilized only as a premium service or at higher rates,” the judge ruled. Bed Bath and Beyond sent multiple messages to OOCL about its booking practices possibly violating US shipping law. Yet the retailer still sought to negotiate a 2022-2023 contract with the carrier. Instead, the company retaliated and refused to deal, the judge’s decision said. An OOCL executive sent an email that said, “Simple solution is to cut back their bookings, then we will have fewer problems with them. With all the customers who want to expand with us, this one jumped to head of the class for deselection.” Another email from an OOCL executive said, “No need to reach out to Bed Bath & Beyond as our rates are purposely higher than what they will ship against.” The emails were entered into evidence as part of the judge’s review. “The evidence shows that OOCL intentionally quoted a reduced MQC and rates so far above market that they cannot be considered a good faith offer or negotiation,” the judge said. OOCL could not be reached for comment. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Container lines

OOCL ordered to pay $45 million for Bed Bath and Beyond’s bumped cargo

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">XPO and other LTL carriers say contract rates are rising by mid-single digits even though industrial demand remains soft, albeit with some bullish indicators apparent. </div>

XPO and other LTL carriers say contract rates are rising by mid-single digits even though industrial demand remains soft, albeit with some bullish indicators apparent.

<div class="phx-topic">US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing is rising faster than demand, with large publicly-owned carriers reporting contractual rate gains in the mid-single-digit range year over year. The stage is being set for further increases in LTL costs when industrial demand really kicks into higher gear, whether that’s in the second or third quarter or as late as 2027. At XPO, the fourth-largest US LTL provider, rates included in contract renewals rose by mid- to high single-digit percentages in the first quarter, the company said Thursday. Average shipments per day rose 3% year over year to 49,834, although tonnage was flat. First-quarter yield, or revenue per hundredweight, in part a measure of pricing, was up 4% year over year, excluding fuel surcharges. Including fuel, yield was up 5.3% from a year ago. “We had a strong quarter of pricing performance,” XPO CEO Mario Harik said during an earnings call with Wall Street analysts. In the second quarter, “we see an increasingly constructive environment that will drive pricing in the future,” Harik said. That environment includes a US producer price index (PPI) for long-distance LTL that is hitting a record high. The all-inclusive LTL PPI rose 7.2% year over year in March to 278, up from its previous high of 259 in June 2022. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="8afcfdff-15ff-4ec3-8c50-af1aba47062e"></dynamic-object></div>In addition to XPO, national carrier Saia said contract renewal rates rose 6.7% year over year in the first quarter and 7% in March. Knight-Swift Transportation reported LTL contract renewals in the mid-single digit range, while price increases at ArcBest averaged 6%. Several converging factors support LTL price increases. Harik cited new customers, new markets, an expansion of premium services, and improvements in service. “We reduced our damage claims ratio below 0.2% with damages at a record low,” Harik said of the first quarter. “This is the service metric that matters most to LTL customers.” <h3>New shippers, new markets </h3>That service metric translates into higher pricing, Harik told the Journal of Commerce Thursday. And add to that an increase in premium services that comes with a higher price. In an interview, Harik said XPO is also pursuing business in markets beyond the traditional industrial sector, including the healthcare and food and grocery businesses. “Today we have a low single-digit market share in grocery, but in the first quarter we tripled our number of grocery customers on a year-over-year basis,” he said. Although industrial freight represents the lion’s share of LTL business, it’s not the fastest-growing segment. While Purchasing Managers’ Indexes (PMIs) have been positive in 2026, “we’re not seeing a meaningful increase” in industrial freight, Harik said. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="16105334-c54a-4d51-9403-6d5bac8369c4"></dynamic-object></div>That doesn’t mean no increase. “Chemicals are doing well, agricultural equipment is doing well, and automotive is starting to build some sea legs,” Harik said. “Other [manufacturing] sectors are not decelerating anymore.” Other carriers are following similar playbooks. FedEx Freight, the largest US LTL provider by revenue and shipments, is chasing <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fedex-freight-plans-diversification-as-spin-off-date-approaches-6201281">more non-industrial freight</a>, specifically data center, healthcare, energy and grocery loads, the company said earlier this month. Saia is also expanding in grocery and data center markets. When growth in core industrial markets is slow, carriers naturally look elsewhere for additional opportunities. Still, there are signals that industrial freight demand is set to increase. Beyond the improvement in manufacturing PMIs, LTL weight per shipment has been rising, albeit slowly and unevenly, with some carriers seeing more gain than others. “In April, our weight per shipment is up on a year-over-year basis, a little over 1%,” Adam Satterfield, CFO of Old Dominion Freight Line, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/odfl-sees-signs-of-growing-ltl-demand-in-sequential-volume-gain-6211522">said Wednesday</a>. “That’s usually a leading indicator of an improving demand environment.” Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing is rising faster than demand, with large publicly-owned carriers reporting contractual rate gains in the mid-single-digit range year over year. The stage is being set for further increases in LTL costs when industrial demand really kicks into higher gear, whether that’s in the second or third quarter or as late as 2027. At XPO, the fourth-largest US LTL provider, rates included in contract renewals rose by mid- to high single-digit percentages in the first quarter, the company said Thursday. Average shipments per day rose 3% year over year to 49,834, although tonnage was flat. First-quarter yield, or revenue per hundredweight, in part a measure of pricing, was up 4% year over year, excluding fuel surcharges. Including fuel, yield was up 5.3% from a year ago. “We had a strong quarter of pricing performance,” XPO CEO Mario Harik said during an earnings call with Wall Street analysts. In the second quarter, “we see an increasingly constructive environment that will drive pricing in the future,” Harik said. That environment includes a US producer price index (PPI) for long-distance LTL that is hitting a record high. The all-inclusive LTL PPI rose 7.2% year over year in March to 278, up from its previous high of 259 in June 2022. In addition to XPO, national carrier Saia said contract renewal rates rose 6.7% year over year in the first quarter and 7% in March. Knight-Swift Transportation reported LTL contract renewals in the mid-single digit range, while price increases at ArcBest averaged 6%. Several converging factors support LTL price increases. Harik cited new customers, new markets, an expansion of premium services, and improvements in service. “We reduced our damage claims ratio below 0.2% with damages at a record low,” Harik said of the first quarter. “This is the service metric that matters most to LTL customers.” New shippers, new markets That service metric translates into higher pricing, Harik told the Journal of Commerce Thursday. And add to that an increase in premium services that comes with a higher price. In an interview, Harik said XPO is also pursuing business in markets beyond the traditional industrial sector, including the healthcare and food and grocery businesses. “Today we have a low single-digit market share in grocery, but in the first quarter we tripled our number of grocery customers on a year-over-year basis,” he said. Although industrial freight represents the lion’s share of LTL business, it’s not the fastest-growing segment. While Purchasing Managers’ Indexes (PMIs) have been positive in 2026, “we’re not seeing a meaningful increase” in industrial freight, Harik said. That doesn’t mean no increase. “Chemicals are doing well, agricultural equipment is doing well, and automotive is starting to build some sea legs,” Harik said. “Other [manufacturing] sectors are not decelerating anymore.” Other carriers are following similar playbooks. FedEx Freight, the largest US LTL provider by revenue and shipments, is chasing more non-industrial freight , specifically data center, healthcare, energy and grocery loads, the company said earlier this month. Saia is also expanding in grocery and data center markets. When growth in core industrial markets is slow, carriers naturally look elsewhere for additional opportunities. Still, there are signals that industrial freight demand is set to increase. Beyond the improvement in manufacturing PMIs, LTL weight per shipment has been rising, albeit slowly and unevenly, with some carriers seeing more gain than others. “In April, our weight per shipment is up on a year-over-year basis, a little over 1%,” Adam Satterfield, CFO of Old Dominion Freight Line, said Wednesday . “That’s usually a leading indicator of an improving demand environment.” Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Surface

US LTL pricing rising ahead of industrial demand: XPO

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The STB now has 30 days to decide whether the application is complete; a formal review by the regulator would likely stretch for more than a year and include public hearings.</div>

The STB now has 30 days to decide whether the application is complete; a formal review by the regulator would likely stretch for more than a year and include public hearings.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific (UP) on Thursday refiled its formal application to acquire Norfolk Southern (NS) with US regulators on Thursday, arguing that additional analysis shows the merger would take more freight moves off highways than originally thought. The updated application to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) calls for 2.1 million truck moves converted to rail, including 1.2 million truckload-to-intermodal conversions. That’s up from 2 million and 1.17 million, respectively, in the original application filed last December that the STB <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/stb-rejects-up-ns-merger-application-as-incomplete-6154074">rejected as “incomplete” in mid-January</a>. UP also revised the number of long-haul drays eliminated annually to 70,000 moves compared with 67,000 in the first application. The eliminated drays would primarily come between Chicago to Ohio and Michigan, and Memphis to Alabama. The revised estimates were made possible because UP received access to other Class I volume data that was not available when it submitted the prior application. The STB now has 30 days to decide whether the application is complete. If the new filing passes that threshold, the formal review by the regulator would likely stretch for more than a year and include public hearings. “I have personally witnessed the benefits to Canada of two transcontinental [freight] railroads,” UP CEO Jim Vena wrote in the new application. “American industry deserves an equally efficient supply chain within its own borders.” Vena also argued that unified rail systems in China, India and Mexico have supported economic growth. He said the merger would save shippers $3.5 billion annually across all commodity groups. For intermodal customers, UP is promising faster service, new long-haul lanes and a slightly larger shift of freight off the highway. But the revised filing also puts more weight on the question regulators and shippers will care about most: Can the network handle that growth without sacrificing reliability? And will the UP-NS combination enhance competition in a way that’s not achievable through better cooperation between railroads? <h3>New and updated routes </h3>The most significant addition for intermodal customers is a new expedited Northern California-to-Southeast service that was not included in the UP’s December filing. The proposed lane would begin in Lathrop, east of Oakland, move through St. Louis and terminate in Charlotte. UP said the service would take 109 hours from origin to destination, versus 108 hours by truck. Containers moving to Atlanta and Jacksonville would connect to a second train in Charlotte for the final leg. The revised filing also addresses the Meridian Speedway, the nearly 300-mile corridor across Louisiana and Mississippi that remains a flashpoint between UP-NS and majority owner Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). In the December filing, UP said it would run 11,000-foot trains over Meridian. But CPKC, which controls traffic on the route, limits train length to 8,500 feet. In the revised filing, UP lowered its average train-length assumption to 9,000 feet and added a provision to split trains as volume grows. The filing also leaves unresolved whether the merged railroad could deliver the projected growth over the Meridian Speedway, as CPKC, not UP-NS, controls all train movements. If trains must be broken into blocks, transit times lengthen and the risk of delay increases. Nevertheless, the service will still likely be faster than the BNSF Railway-CSX Transportation alternative because the length of haul through the Meridian Speedway is much shorter by distance. There were no changes to how the Meridian Speedway trains would impact domestic intermodal shippers between Los Angeles and Memphis. UP would still remove 191 containers per day from a train in Greggton, Texas, and place them onto a second train to Memphis. The route would be one of the few examples where a combined railroad would create additional work post-merger, rather than eliminate it, for intermodal customers. It is one of the clearest examples of the merger’s mixed intermodal effect: new conversion opportunities in some lanes, but more complexity and more service risk in others. Other intermodal services in the prior application remain unchanged. UP-NS would add trains from Southern California to New Jersey via Kansas City, bypassing Chicago. The application also keeps proposed services from Lathrop to New Jersey, from Southern California to Detroit, from Laredo to New Jersey, and from Houston to Atlanta. <h3>Trimming capital expenditures </h3>The revised application, however, trims the capital expenditures that UP would lay out to keep the network fluid. The December filing called for more than $1 billion in capital spending on signals, track, sidings and terminals to absorb growth without hurting service. The new filing cuts that sum to $923.3 million, which could raise the prospect of pushback during the public hearings about why UP decided to cut back on infrastructure spending. One of the biggest reductions is at UP’s Houston intermodal terminal. In December, UP said it would add 1,045 parking stalls, two new working tracks and an automated gate to support new Laredo and Houston intermodal trains. In the revised filing, that plan is scaled back to 558 parking spaces and a smaller automated gate, removing about $68 million in spending. UP said the lower investment reflects an updated analysis that shows a lower impact on terminals operations in Houston than originally anticipated. Other projects were dropped altogether. The December application included $7.4 million for 5,205 feet of support track at the Croxton intermodal terminal in New Jersey. That project is no longer in the revised plan. UP left spending unchanged for siding extensions, double-track additions and signal work across the Gulf Coast and Midwest. <h3>Opposition organizing </h3>UP’s revised application will nonetheless face swift resistance. Earlier this week, a new group was formed called the Stop the Rail Merger Coalition, which organized existing merger opponents such as BNSF, CPKC, the Teamsters Rail Conference, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the American Chemistry Council under a single umbrella. The group released a report Wednesday that included a survey claiming that 71% of those polled oppose the merger after learning about its impacts, and that 68% believe the merged railroad would keep the promised cost savings for itself rather than pass them onto shippers. “This did not begin with a customer asking for a UP-NS merger to happen,” BNSF CEO Katie Famer said in a statement from Stop the Rail Merger Coalition. “It’s driven by Wall Street on the promise of a big shareholder payout. It will eliminate competition, raise costs for consumers, and destabilize the supply chain that powers the American economy.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Union Pacific (UP) on Thursday refiled its formal application to acquire Norfolk Southern (NS) with US regulators on Thursday, arguing that additional analysis shows the merger would take more freight moves off highways than originally thought. The updated application to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) calls for 2.1 million truck moves converted to rail, including 1.2 million truckload-to-intermodal conversions. That’s up from 2 million and 1.17 million, respectively, in the original application filed last December that the STB rejected as “incomplete” in mid-January . UP also revised the number of long-haul drays eliminated annually to 70,000 moves compared with 67,000 in the first application. The eliminated drays would primarily come between Chicago to Ohio and Michigan, and Memphis to Alabama. The revised estimates were made possible because UP received access to other Class I volume data that was not available when it submitted the prior application. The STB now has 30 days to decide whether the application is complete. If the new filing passes that threshold, the formal review by the regulator would likely stretch for more than a year and include public hearings. “I have personally witnessed the benefits to Canada of two transcontinental [freight] railroads,” UP CEO Jim Vena wrote in the new application. “American industry deserves an equally efficient supply chain within its own borders.” Vena also argued that unified rail systems in China, India and Mexico have supported economic growth. He said the merger would save shippers $3.5 billion annually across all commodity groups. For intermodal customers, UP is promising faster service, new long-haul lanes and a slightly larger shift of freight off the highway. But the revised filing also puts more weight on the question regulators and shippers will care about most: Can the network handle that growth without sacrificing reliability? And will the UP-NS combination enhance competition in a way that’s not achievable through better cooperation between railroads? New and updated routes The most significant addition for intermodal customers is a new expedited Northern California-to-Southeast service that was not included in the UP’s December filing. The proposed lane would begin in Lathrop, east of Oakland, move through St. Louis and terminate in Charlotte. UP said the service would take 109 hours from origin to destination, versus 108 hours by truck. Containers moving to Atlanta and Jacksonville would connect to a second train in Charlotte for the final leg. The revised filing also addresses the Meridian Speedway, the nearly 300-mile corridor across Louisiana and Mississippi that remains a flashpoint between UP-NS and majority owner Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). In the December filing, UP said it would run 11,000-foot trains over Meridian. But CPKC, which controls traffic on the route, limits train length to 8,500 feet. In the revised filing, UP lowered its average train-length assumption to 9,000 feet and added a provision to split trains as volume grows. The filing also leaves unresolved whether the merged railroad could deliver the projected growth over the Meridian Speedway, as CPKC, not UP-NS, controls all train movements. If trains must be broken into blocks, transit times lengthen and the risk of delay increases. Nevertheless, the service will still likely be faster than the BNSF Railway-CSX Transportation alternative because the length of haul through the Meridian Speedway is much shorter by distance. There were no changes to how the Meridian Speedway trains would impact domestic intermodal shippers between Los Angeles and Memphis. UP would still remove 191 containers per day from a train in Greggton, Texas, and place them onto a second train to Memphis. The route would be one of the few examples where a combined railroad would create additional work post-merger, rather than eliminate it, for intermodal customers. It is one of the clearest examples of the merger’s mixed intermodal effect: new conversion opportunities in some lanes, but more complexity and more service risk in others. Other intermodal services in the prior application remain unchanged. UP-NS would add trains from Southern California to New Jersey via Kansas City, bypassing Chicago. The application also keeps proposed services from Lathrop to New Jersey, from Southern California to Detroit, from Laredo to New Jersey, and from Houston to Atlanta. Trimming capital expenditures The revised application, however, trims the capital expenditures that UP would lay out to keep the network fluid. The December filing called for more than $1 billion in capital spending on signals, track, sidings and terminals to absorb growth without hurting service. The new filing cuts that sum to $923.3 million, which could raise the prospect of pushback during the public hearings about why UP decided to cut back on infrastructure spending. One of the biggest reductions is at UP’s Houston intermodal terminal. In December, UP said it would add 1,045 parking stalls, two new working tracks and an automated gate to support new Laredo and Houston intermodal trains. In the revised filing, that plan is scaled back to 558 parking spaces and a smaller automated gate, removing about $68 million in spending. UP said the lower investment reflects an updated analysis that shows a lower impact on terminals operations in Houston than originally anticipated. Other projects were dropped altogether. The December application included $7.4 million for 5,205 feet of support track at the Croxton intermodal terminal in New Jersey. That project is no longer in the revised plan. UP left spending unchanged for siding extensions, double-track additions and signal work across the Gulf Coast and Midwest. Opposition organizing UP’s revised application will nonetheless face swift resistance. Earlier this week, a new group was formed called the Stop the Rail Merger Coalition, which organized existing merger opponents such as BNSF, CPKC, the Teamsters Rail Conference, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the American Chemistry Council under a single umbrella. The group released a report Wednesday that included a survey claiming that 71% of those polled oppose the merger after learning about its impacts, and that 68% believe the merged railroad would keep the promised cost savings for itself rather than pass them onto shippers. “This did not begin with a customer asking for a UP-NS merger to happen,” BNSF CEO Katie Famer said in a statement from Stop the Rail Merger Coalition. “It’s driven by Wall Street on the promise of a big shareholder payout. It will eliminate competition, raise costs for consumers, and destabilize the supply chain that powers the American economy.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Rail News

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

UP’s revised filing for NS merger boosts number of freight conversions

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The carrier and ports group said revenue on all major trades, except its domestic network, fell in the first quarter, resulting in a 13% drop in revenue from container shipping. </div>

The carrier and ports group said revenue on all major trades, except its domestic network, fell in the first quarter, resulting in a 13% drop in revenue from container shipping.

<div class="phx-topic">Cosco Shipping is redoubling efforts to expand into developing markets, including Latin America and Africa, in the face of a tougher economic and geopolitical environment, the container and ports group said. “Impacted by conflicts in the Middle East, the safety and stability of global shipping faced significant challenges,” the carrier said in a first-quarter earnings statement late Wednesday. “In the face of rapidly changing international political and economic conditions ... [Cosco is] ... making sustained efforts, particularly in the development of emerging markets, the establishment of a global digital supply chain product system, and digital and intelligent innovation,” it said. Cosco was commenting as it reported a 49% drop in first-quarter net profits to $861 million due to plunging freight rates, despite an increase in volumes. Total first-quarter revenue fell 11% to $7.6 billion. “The group’s container shipping business experienced a year-on-year decrease in revenue per TEU and a year-on-year decrease in operating performance,” Cosco said, noting that the average China Export Containerized Freight Index (CCFI) fell 16.32% year over year in the first quarter. The carrier’s revenue per TEU on international routes fell 15% to $1,110 in the first quarter. Cosco said revenue on all its major trades except its domestic network fell in the first quarter, resulting in a 13% drop in revenue from container shipping, to $6.6 billion. That came despite a 6.7% increase in container volumes, to 6.9 million TEUs. The biggest drop in Cosco’s first-quarter revenue was on trans-Pacific trades, which fell 23% to $1.8 billion even as liftings slipped just 1% to 1.2 million TEUs. Trans-Atlantic, Latin America and Africa trades saw a combined 22% revenue decline to $962 million, while liftings were 1.6% lower at 757,524 TEUs. Revenue from Asia-Europe services fell 10% to $1.4 billion in the first quarter despite a 14% increase in volumes to 1 million TEUs. Cosco’s ports subsidiary recorded a 2% rise in first-quarter net profit to $86 million, while revenue was 10% higher at $421 million. Total container throughput at Cosco terminals climbed 9% year over year to 39 million TEUs. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Cosco Shipping is redoubling efforts to expand into developing markets, including Latin America and Africa, in the face of a tougher economic and geopolitical environment, the container and ports group said. “Impacted by conflicts in the Middle East, the safety and stability of global shipping faced significant challenges,” the carrier said in a first-quarter earnings statement late Wednesday. “In the face of rapidly changing international political and economic conditions ... [Cosco is] ... making sustained efforts, particularly in the development of emerging markets, the establishment of a global digital supply chain product system, and digital and intelligent innovation,” it said. Cosco was commenting as it reported a 49% drop in first-quarter net profits to $861 million due to plunging freight rates, despite an increase in volumes. Total first-quarter revenue fell 11% to $7.6 billion. “The group’s container shipping business experienced a year-on-year decrease in revenue per TEU and a year-on-year decrease in operating performance,” Cosco said, noting that the average China Export Containerized Freight Index (CCFI) fell 16.32% year over year in the first quarter. The carrier’s revenue per TEU on international routes fell 15% to $1,110 in the first quarter. Cosco said revenue on all its major trades except its domestic network fell in the first quarter, resulting in a 13% drop in revenue from container shipping, to $6.6 billion. That came despite a 6.7% increase in container volumes, to 6.9 million TEUs. The biggest drop in Cosco’s first-quarter revenue was on trans-Pacific trades, which fell 23% to $1.8 billion even as liftings slipped just 1% to 1.2 million TEUs. Trans-Atlantic, Latin America and Africa trades saw a combined 22% revenue decline to $962 million, while liftings were 1.6% lower at 757,524 TEUs. Revenue from Asia-Europe services fell 10% to $1.4 billion in the first quarter despite a 14% increase in volumes to 1 million TEUs. Cosco’s ports subsidiary recorded a 2% rise in first-quarter net profit to $86 million, while revenue was 10% higher at $421 million. Total container throughput at Cosco terminals climbed 9% year over year to 39 million TEUs. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Trans-Atlantic

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Cosco doubles down on emerging trades as Q1 net profit plunges 49% 

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Cosco subsidiary said the 13,600-TEU ships have been ordered from Shanghai-based shipyard Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding for delivery between 2028 and 2030.</div>

The Cosco subsidiary said the 13,600-TEU ships have been ordered from Shanghai-based shipyard Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding for delivery between 2028 and 2030.

<div class="phx-topic">Hong Kong-based OOCL has ordered its first liquefied natural gas (LNG) vessels with a $2.2 billion deal for a dozen 13,600-TEU dual-fuel ships as part of a shift to more environmentally-friendly vessels, the carrier said Thursday. The Cosco Shipping subsidiary said the ships have been ordered from Shanghai-based shipyard Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding for delivery between 2028 and 2030. The choice of LNG and other green fuel technologies “is expected to reduce the need to purchase carbon credits,” OOCL said in a filing to the Hong Kong stock exchange. The size of the ships meant they “are versatile and suitable for deployment across a wide range of trade routes and terminals,” the carrier added. “...The vessels will enhance the group’s ability to serve diversified cargo demand.” OOCL’s order reinforces LNG as the next-generation fuel of choice for carriers renewing their fleets. LNG now accounts for about 83% of the dual-fuel container ships on order, or about 6.4 million TEUs in capacity terms, according to data on the Journal of Commerce’s Gateway platform. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ef78ab1f-3609-44d0-a713-fb260bc40609"></dynamic-object></div>OOCL said it invited quotes from at least three shipbuilders, but two declined to bid due to limited shipbuilding slot availability and resources. Hudong-Zhonghua’s price of $185 million per ship is comparable to the prevailing market price of new LNG dual-fuel powered container vessels of similar tonnage. The latest order takes OOCL’s backlog of new vessels to 18 ships after it signed agreements with Seaspan <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/volatile-shipping-market-drags-down-oocls-2025-financial-results-6185356">to charter six 13,000-TEU container vessels</a>. Those ships are expected to be delivered from the fourth quarter of this year through the first quarter of 2028. The orders announced Thursday are the first that OOCL has placed for owned 13,000-TEU ships since 2013, the carrier said. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

Hong Kong-based OOCL has ordered its first liquefied natural gas (LNG) vessels with a $2.2 billion deal for a dozen 13,600-TEU dual-fuel ships as part of a shift to more environmentally-friendly vessels, the carrier said Thursday. The Cosco Shipping subsidiary said the ships have been ordered from Shanghai-based shipyard Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding for delivery between 2028 and 2030. The choice of LNG and other green fuel technologies “is expected to reduce the need to purchase carbon credits,” OOCL said in a filing to the Hong Kong stock exchange. The size of the ships meant they “are versatile and suitable for deployment across a wide range of trade routes and terminals,” the carrier added. “...The vessels will enhance the group’s ability to serve diversified cargo demand.” OOCL’s order reinforces LNG as the next-generation fuel of choice for carriers renewing their fleets. LNG now accounts for about 83% of the dual-fuel container ships on order, or about 6.4 million TEUs in capacity terms, according to data on the Journal of Commerce’s Gateway platform. OOCL said it invited quotes from at least three shipbuilders, but two declined to bid due to limited shipbuilding slot availability and resources. Hudong-Zhonghua’s price of $185 million per ship is comparable to the prevailing market price of new LNG dual-fuel powered container vessels of similar tonnage. The latest order takes OOCL’s backlog of new vessels to 18 ships after it signed agreements with Seaspan to charter six 13,000-TEU container vessels . Those ships are expected to be delivered from the fourth quarter of this year through the first quarter of 2028. The orders announced Thursday are the first that OOCL has placed for owned 13,000-TEU ships since 2013, the carrier said. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

OOCL orders its first LNG-fueled ships with $2 billion deal for 12 vessels

Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

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

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code SSFTW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SPRING SALE!

Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SSGFTW895 at checkout to save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSFTW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on an annual Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSGFTW895 and save $600 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

OOCL ordered to pay $45 million for Bed Bath and Beyond’s bumped cargo

US LTL pricing rising ahead of industrial demand: XPO

UP’s revised filing for NS merger boosts number of freight conversions