<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">My experience with the industry shows me ocean carriers do not play well together. But, it could happen: there could be industry cooperation for the second time in my lengthy career. </div>

My experience with the industry shows me ocean carriers do not play well together. But, it could happen: there could be industry cooperation for the second time in my lengthy career.

<div>In February, I addressed the issue of using technology after refining the processes it is supposed to support. At the <a>18th Annual TPM Conference in Long Beach in March</a>, there were several very good presentations on initiatives being undertaken to enhance ocean and other modes of transportation. <a>Peter Tirschwell’s</a> column in the April 2 issue of The Journal of Commerce notes <a>the requirement for standardization in blockchain</a>, or at least being “interoperable,” to maximize the benefits for the entire industry.There is a need to somehow corral those involved into cooperating in some manner to avoid the silo effect. As someone...

In February, I addressed the issue of using technology after refining the processes it is supposed to support. At the 18th Annual TPM Conference in Long Beach in March , there were several very good presentations on initiatives being undertaken to enhance ocean and other modes of transportation. Peter Tirschwell’s column in the April 2 issue of The Journal of Commerce notes the requirement for standardization in blockchain , or at least being “interoperable,” to maximize the benefits for the entire industry. There is a need to somehow corral those involved into cooperating in some manner to avoid the silo effect. As someone who has been around the ocean carrier industry for more than 45 years, my reaction is, “Are they kidding?” Silos in blockchain are already apparent with more than a dozen known initiatives under way, several involving ocean carriers — all independent of each other. Carriers do not play well together My experience with the industry shows me ocean carriers do not play well together. Start with antitrust immunity to fix prices virtually globally — a license to print money — yet the average rate of return under those favorable conditions was about 3 percent. Although many of the carriers were greatly subsidized by their countries, literally dozens left the industry because the returns could not justify the investment. Why? Because they were hyper-competitive, and even with government subsidies, they were managed in a way to not make a real business return. So many of those governments, including the United States, said, “No more.” The access to chassis in the United States underscores another example of a lack of cooperation. For decades, the US trade was the only one where chassis were provided, an outgrowth of the initial container service being a coastwise US domestic service between Florida and Texas, competing with trucks. It was also a “simpler and easier” operation, everything on wheels. Global volumes grew rapidly, and terminal space tightened. The rate of return became a paramount issue, and carriers looked closely at their costs; they started reducing extended free time on detention (containers and chassis outside of the terminal). They were partially successful in reducing some of the truly absurd free-time provisions and started discussing eliminating providing chassis in the United States. This was in the late 1980s. In the 1990s, they continued discussions on chassis, and finally in the early 2000s said, “That’s it, we won’t provide chassis in the United States any longer.” Eighteen years later, they still provide chassis on an exception basis, and some carriers still provide them on all US shipments. And we could spend weeks on rate levels, discussing the logic of how much damage carriers do to themselves because of their hyper-competitiveness. Recently, in a three-day period, one JOC article described the surge in exports from China because of fears of a possible trade war between the United States and China . Logic says when the markets strengthen, prices rise. Another JOC article described spot rates dropping. Both were factual and accurate. But common business logic is defied because of the hyper-competitiveness that carriers cannot seem to overcome. Logic rarely applies in the container shipping industry Logic happened once in my four-plus decades in the industry, in 2010. Beginning in 2006, the supply-demand ratios began to shift as the global economy started to tank when many carriers were beginning to order larger vessels following the lead of Maersk Line, which understood the significance of having a low-cost operation. By 2009, the industry was in dire financial straits, and late that year the carriers started to anchor vessels. Aerial photos of the bay at Singapore showed what looked like ants covering a cookie. They were container ships covering the ocean. By early 2010, more than 600 container ships were sitting at anchor in Singapore, the fjords in northern Europe, and wherever they could find anchorage space. Carriers lost more than $21 billion in 2009, and made a little more than $8 billion in 2010 — a nearly $30 billion swing in one year. The model was set, right? In 2011 and through 2016, the industry lost money every year, the vessels at anchor fell to under 200, and carriers ordered larger vessels by the dozens. That led to the collapse of one large carrier and the consolidation of the industry to what it is today, four large carriers, another six to eight medium-sized carriers, and another 40 or so plying various markets. Which brings me back to the issue of getting cooperation from those pursuing technology to improve services and reduce costs. Reality is that it is a form of differentiation between competitors. I doubt Maersk and IBM are developing their blockchain program for the sake of all mankind, or even the industry. The same goes for all the others pursuing not only blockchain but other technology solutions to the various challenges in supply chains and logistics. It could happen: there could be industry cooperation for the second time in my lengthy career. The first time lasted a year and was never repeated. Being the skeptical optimist, I doubt there will be a second time. Gary Ferrulli is chief executive officer of Global Logistics & Transport Consulting. Contact him at gferrulli@globallogisticsandtransport.com .

Container lines

Tech can't break down container shipping silos

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US imports rebounded to a record high in 2024 amid widespread frontloading, while exports expanded slightly for the second straight year.</div>

US imports rebounded to a record high in 2024 amid widespread frontloading, while exports expanded slightly for the second straight year.

Feature image

The largest US shippers grew their volumes at a faster rate than the overall market last year, according to the 2025 Journal of Commerce Top 100 US Importers and Exporters rankings. Containerized imports to the US rebounded to a record high in 2024 amid widespread frontloading aimed at mitigating the risk of longshore labor disruption and, later in the year, looming tariffs. Against this backdrop, the Top 100 Importers saw their combined volumes surge an estimated 34.1% year over year. Total container imports spiked 15.3% to 25.66 million TEUs in 2024, more than offsetting a 13% decline in 2023 and narrowly surpassing the previous high of 25.57 million TEUs achieved in both 2021 and 2022, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. On the export side, outbound container volumes from the US expanded slightly for the second straight year in 2024 after snapping a three-year skid in 2023. Volumes among the Top 100 Exporters jumped an estimated 14.1% for the full year, while total US exports grew 0.9% in 2024 following a 0.3% uptick in 2023. The annual container volumes of major importers and exporters are not publicly available, so the Top 100 rankings are the best approximation using analysis of PIERS data, confirmation of volumes with cargo owners, and limited modeling. Modeling factors include historical volumes, industry vertical growth and company revenue growth. 2025 Journal of Commerce Top 100 US Importers Annual containerized US imports in 2024, in laden TEUs Rank Importer TEUs Sector 1 Walmart 960,000 Retail 2 Home Depot 516,000 Retail 3 Target 420,000 Retail 4 LG Group 309,160 Conglomerate 5 Lowe's 254,242 Retail 6 Amazon 250,000 Retail 7 Ashley Furniture 207,190 Furniture 8 Chiquita Brands International 189,058 Foodstuffs 9 Dollar Tree 180,283 Retail 10 Samsung SDS 150,357 Conglomerate 11 Fresh Del Monte Produce 133,299 Foodstuffs 12 Hyundai Motor Company, Mobis 115,707 Automotive goods 13 IKEA 110,557 Retail 14 Williams-Sonoma 110,000 Retail 15 Ross Stores 101,500 Retail 16 GE Appliances, a Haier Company 95,000 Retail/Household Goods 17 Tesla 89,000 Automotive goods 18 General Motors 87,568 Automotive goods 19 First Solar 85,651 Solar 20 Sumitomo Corporation 83,500 Conglomerate 21 Newell Brands 64,000 Electronics 22 Bob’s Discount Furniture 61,776 Household goods 23 Rooms to Go 61,000 Furniture 24 Heineken USA 57,802 Alcoholic beverages 25 Dollar General 55,124 Retail 26 Tractor Supply Company 53,600 Retail 27 Daimler Trucks 53,375 Automotive goods 28 Electrolux 51,824 Electronics and household goods 29 John Deere 50,000 Heavy machinery 30 Kohl's 50,000 Retail 31 Michelin North America 47,219 Automotive goods 32 Toyota Tsusho America 45,802 Automotive goods 33 Kubota Tractor Company 45,490 Heavy machinery 34 VF Corp. 43,800 Apparel and footwear 35 Costco Wholesale 39,360 Retail 36 Best Buy 39,000 Electronics 37 At Home 38,500 Retail 38 Yokohama Tire 38,352 Automotive goods 39 Q Cells 38,188 Solar 40 Trina Solar 38,000 Solar 41 Continental Tire 36,169 Automotive goods 42 Hankook Tire America 35,244 Automotive goods 43 Goodyear Rubber & Tire 35,089 Automotive goods 44 Red Bull 35,000 Foodstuffs 45 Dole Packaged Foods 33,000 Foodstuffs 46 Ford Motor Co 32,727 Automotive goods 47 Element Electronics 31,603 Electronics 48 Toyo Tires 31,363 Automotive goods 49 BYD 31,000 Automotive goods 50 JA Solar 30,584 Solar 51 Sailun Tire Americas 30,030 Automotive goods 52 Adidas Group 29,237 Apparel and footwear 53 BSH Hausgeräte 29,000 Consumer products 54 Euromarket Designs 28,997 Retail 55 TMALL 28,837 Retail 56 Living Spaces Furniture 28,711 Furniture 57 Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits 27,433 Foodstuffs 58 Bissell Homecare 27,000 Household goods 59 Subaru of america 26,426 Automotive goods 60 Dollarama L.P. 25,591 Retail 61 Cardinal Health 24,993 Health care 62 Midea Group 24,621 Household goods 63 Conair LLC 23,992 Electronics 64 Mitsubishi Motors 23,614 Automotive goods 65 SharkNinja Operating LLC 23,483 Household goods 66 Kumho Tire 23,238 Automotive goods 67 Stanley Black & Decker 22,800 Manufacture  68 LKQ Homecare 22,762 Automotive goods 69 Keter North America Inc 22,575 Storage 70 Goya Foods 22,443 Foodstuffs 71 Volkswagen Group 21,900 Automotive goods 72 Curtis International 20,998 Electronics 73 Raymour & Flanigan 20,276 Retail 74 Yamaha Motor Corporation 20,150 Automotive goods 75 Sol Foods 20,008 Foodstuffs 76 Dorel Industries 20,000 Conglomerate 77 BJ's Wholesale Club 19,928 Retail 78 Sentury Tire 18,973 Automotive goods 79 SanMar 18,940 Footwear and apparel 80 Fiji Water 18,441 Retail 81 American Furniture Warehouse 18,212 Furniture 82 ESWINDOWS 18,000 Glass manufacturer  83 Mattel 17,911 Toys and games 84 Dick's Sporting Goods 17,584 Retail sporting goods 85 JOANN 17,551 Haberdashery and mercery 86 Hewlett-Packard 17,263 Computer technology 87 QVC 17,087 Retail 88 Olam International 16,659 Cotton, spices and vegetables 89 New Balance Athletics 16,638 Footwear and apparel 90 The Vita Coco Company 16,553 Foodstuffs 91 Tireco 16,293 Automotive goods 92 ArdoVLM 16,124 Foodstuffs 93 LollicupStore 16,067 Retail 94 Walgreens 15,467 Retail 95 API Tires  14,729 Automotive goods 96 CMPC Maderas 14,652 Paper product 97 Hyosung Motors 14,401 Automotive goods 98 Procter & Gamble 14,377 Conglomerate 99 Danone Waters 14,256 Foodstuffs 100 EGA America Inc 14,221 Metals and recyclables © 2025 S&P Global 2025 Journal of Commerce Top 100 US Exporters Annual containerized US exports in 2024, in laden TEUs Rank Exporter TEUs Sector 1 International Paper 230,000 Paper and packaging 2 Dow Chemical 199,000 Chemicals  3 Koch Industries 194,113 Conglomerate 4 DeLong 147,120 Animal Feed and Grain 5 ExxonMobil Chemical 140,000 Chemicals 6 America Chung Nam 111,788 Paper and plastics recyclables 7 Winfibre 100,000 Paper and recyclables 8 Scoular 97,623 Animal Feed and Grain 9 Archer Daniels Midland  97,000 Foodstuffs 10 Ravago 95,019 Chemicals 11 International Forest Products LLC. 82,238 Packaging, paper products, pulp, forest products and recyclables 12 Newport CH International 81,857 Paper, metals and plastics recyclables 13 Shintech 80,375 Chemicals 14 WM Recycle America 80,226 Diversified recyclables 15 POET Nutrition 78,832 Animal Feed and Grain 16 Sims Metal Management 78,501 Metal and electronics recyclables 17 JBS USA 77,639 Refrigerated meats and poultry 18 Gavilon/Viterra USA 73,000 Animal Feed and Grain 19 CellMark Group 72,108 Diversified 20 The Anderson's Inc. 68,341 Agricultural goods 21 Cargill 67,694 Conglomerate 22 Louis Dreyfus Company 66,478 Cotton 23 Tricon Energy 64,262 Chemicals 24 Smurfit Westrock 55,280 Paper and packaging 25 BMW of North America 55,000 Automotive goods 26 CHS 54,822 Agriculture, energy and foodstuffs 27 Frey Commodities 54,129 Commodity trading 28 Olam International 48,000 Cotton, spices and vegetables 29 Eastman Chemical 47,145 Chemicals, fibers and plastics 30 Chevron Phillips Chemical 47,000 Chemicals 31 Tyson Foods 46,394 Refrigerated meats and poultry 32 Domtar 44,700 Paper and forest products 33 Walmart 43,649 Retail 34 Prairie Creek Grain 42,957 Plastics, rubber and chemicals 35 Cycle Link 42,170 Recycling  36 PriceSmart, Inc. 41,933 Membership warehouse club 37 Montachem International 41,229 Plastics 38 EM Solutions Inc. 41,000 Electronics manufacturing 39 Rayonier Advanced Materials 40,768 Chemicals and forest products 40 Almarai 40,000 Animal feed 41 SA Recycling 38,885 Recycling  42 Vinmar International LTD 37,000 Chemicals and plastics 43 Smithfield Foods 36,000 Foodstuffs 44 Canusa Hershman Recycling 33,818 Diversified recyclables 45 Celanese 33,500 Chemicals 46 AJC International 33,410 Foodstuffs 47 Staple Cotton 33,214 Cotton 48 International Feed 33,000 Agricultural goods 49 Fresh Del Monte Produce 32,000 Foodstuffs 50 KaMin 31,258 Minerals and clay 51 Alco Iron and Metal 30,914 Metals and recyclables 52 Daimler Trucks 30,000 Automotive goods 53 Valero 29,811 Petrochemical products 54 Al Dahra ACX Inc 28,678 Animal Feed and Grain 55 Genesis Resource Enterprises 28,628 Paper and recyclables 56 Ekman Group 28,000 Paper and recyclables 57 U.S. Borax Inc. 27,272 Chemicals 58 Stone Arch Commodities 26,030 Animal Feed and Grain 59 Vipa Group 25,012 Paper and recyclables 60 NORAG 25,000 Agricultural goods 61 DuPont 24,664 Diversified 62 Ascend Performance Materials 23,740 Chemicals, fibers and plastics 63 Mitsui & Co. 23,253 Conglomerate 64 Perdue 23,157 Foodstuffs 65 GE Healthcare 23,044 Retail/Household Goods 66 Fornazor International 22,703 Animal feed 67 Haykingdom 21,000 Agricultural goods 68 Potential Industries 20,866 Paper and recyclables 69 Hawkeye Gold 20,770 Minerals 70 Costco Wholesale 20,482 Retail 71 Sappi North America 20,468 Paper and recyclables 72 CELANESE 20,088 Chemicals 73 Michelin North America 18,088 Automotive goods 74 Procter & Gamble 18,061 Consumer Goods 75 Khanna Paper 18,000 Paper prodcuts 76 Seaboard Foods 17,178 Foodstuffs 77 America Metal Export 16,378 Metals and recyclables 78 Active Minerals International 16,337 Minerals 79 Gildan Activewear 15,965 Apparel and footwear 80 Pilgrim's Pride 15,577 Foodstuffs 81 Central National Gottesman 14,393 Paper and forest products 82 Graphic Packaging International 14,042 Paper prodcuts 83 Toyota Tsusho America 13,887 Automotive goods 84 Bayer CropScience 13,761 Agricultural goods 85 National Beef 13,724 Foodstuffs 86 Allan Company 12,741 Paper and recyclables 87 Anheuser Busch InBev 12,585 Foodstuffs 88 Healthy Green Life 12,341 Consumer Goods 89 Wheaton Grain 11,865 Agricultural goods 90 Home Depot 11,614 Retail 91 Fibre Trade 11,474 Paper and recyclables 92 Caterpillar 11,308 Heavy machinery 93 Anderson Hay & Grain 10,900 Animal feed 94 Forest Marketing Enterprises 10,511 Forest products 95 Hayburg 10,394 Agricultural goods 96 Intervision Foods 10,307 Foodstuffs 97 Conveyco Technologies 10,207 Manufacture 98 Zen Trading 9,894 Animal Feed and Grain 99 Mountaire Farms 9,144 Animal Feed and Grain 100 Sysco 9,074 Foodstuffs © 2025 S&P Global © 2025 S&P Global.

Trans-Atlantic

Trans-Pacific

Container Shipping News

Top 100 Importer/Exporter Rankings: Largest US shippers outpace hot market

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">A slip in a key sentiment index reveals the MPV sector’s vulnerability to general market uncertainty, but operators remain optimistic that the cargo pipeline remains robust. </div>

A slip in a key sentiment index reveals the MPV sector’s vulnerability to general market uncertainty, but operators remain optimistic that the cargo pipeline remains robust.

<div class="phx-topic">A sense of unease has settled over the project cargo sector as softening multipurpose freight rates and a climate of near-term market uncertainty prevail, stakeholders say. The benchmark indicator for the multipurpose vessel (MPV) sector, the One World Shipbrokers’ Market Sentiment Index (MSI) that was published Tuesday, reflects the headwinds facing the industry, dropping from 54.3 in the previous edition to 53.3 points. Still, the figure remains above the crucial 50-point mark, which delineates generally positive versus negative sentiment. Friday &amp; Co shipbroker Justin Archard, creator of the One World Shipbrokers’ MSI, noted that at the time of polling for the latest index, the announcement of a highly punitive US tariff regime had just been made, followed quickly by a moratorium on many of those tariffs after significant convulsions in equity and bond markets. Archard said that “nothing stops investment and growth like uncertainty and much of the business world is now sitting on its hands waiting for the situation to play out.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="f0797b66-fe22-4f8b-aeed-cca72e834834"></dynamic-object></div>Operators are observing that shipping committed cargo remains a priority, while shipments that can be delayed are being postponed. Michael Morland, project cargo director for the Atlantic at G2 Ocean, told the Journal of Commerce that new projects are facing difficulties in obtaining final investment decisions (FID) due to the shifting economic climate, particularly for industrial projects and commodities. Morland added that doubts about future project cargo volumes are "increasing risk and making importers hesitant." Felix Schoeller, director at AAL Shipping, told the Journal of Commerce that “many stakeholders are adopting a wait-and-see approach to current investment decisions … any shift in trade patterns will take time to materialize — if at all.” Schoeller expects the current situation to calm in the coming months, providing a clearer picture of policies and tariffs, which will allow for a better assessment of market development. Lars Bonnesen, managing director of Germany’s United Heavy Lift (UHL), described the current market as “a bit of a rollercoaster, and it’s quite difficult to prepare for the future with any certainty.” Data from Esgian, the Norwegian shipbroker and maritime consultancy, showed UHL and G2 Ocean were among the MPV operators heavily focused on the US market. Some 68% of UHL’s ocean sailings last year were on US trade lanes, while for G2 Ocean, 51% of sailings were between the US and the East Coast of South America, according an Esgian analysis of route data from last year published in its February market report. <h3>Underlying fundamentals still strong </h3>Despite the pervasive uncertainty, the MPV fleet remains largely fully employed, with both freight and time charter levels at healthy and sustainable levels. While the sale and purchase market for MPVs is currently experiencing difficulties due to valuation gaps between buyers and sellers, quality tonnage is achieving strong rates on the commercial charter market, offering owners a viable alternative to selling. Looking ahead, MPV operators and owners still anticipate the MSI to be higher in a year’s time, though confidence in the future market environment has waned over the last three MSI editions. Bonnesen mirrored the confidence about longer-term prospects. ”I’m not overly concerned about the current situation,” he said. “All in all, I feel quite confident. On top of that, our order books are pretty full for the next three to four years.” A notable MSI development highlighted by Archard is the unprecedented convergence of regional sentiment. Sentiment in the Americas is described as being in “relative freefall,” while Asian carriers maintain a more positive longer-term outlook. The One World Shipbrokers’ Market Sentiment Index (MSI) averages the responses from an anonymous group of 20 to 30 MPV owners and operators to a set of breakbulk shipping-related questions. A reading of 50 is neutral, indicating a static market, while scores below 50 show pessimism or wariness and scores above 50 indicate optimism. Contact Carly Fields at <a href="mailto:carly.fields@spglobal.com">carly.fields@spglobal.com</a>. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com.</a></div>

A sense of unease has settled over the project cargo sector as softening multipurpose freight rates and a climate of near-term market uncertainty prevail, stakeholders say. The benchmark indicator for the multipurpose vessel (MPV) sector, the One World Shipbrokers’ Market Sentiment Index (MSI) that was published Tuesday, reflects the headwinds facing the industry, dropping from 54.3 in the previous edition to 53.3 points. Still, the figure remains above the crucial 50-point mark, which delineates generally positive versus negative sentiment. Friday & Co shipbroker Justin Archard, creator of the One World Shipbrokers’ MSI, noted that at the time of polling for the latest index, the announcement of a highly punitive US tariff regime had just been made, followed quickly by a moratorium on many of those tariffs after significant convulsions in equity and bond markets. Archard said that “nothing stops investment and growth like uncertainty and much of the business world is now sitting on its hands waiting for the situation to play out.” Operators are observing that shipping committed cargo remains a priority, while shipments that can be delayed are being postponed. Michael Morland, project cargo director for the Atlantic at G2 Ocean, told the Journal of Commerce that new projects are facing difficulties in obtaining final investment decisions (FID) due to the shifting economic climate, particularly for industrial projects and commodities. Morland added that doubts about future project cargo volumes are "increasing risk and making importers hesitant." Felix Schoeller, director at AAL Shipping, told the Journal of Commerce that “many stakeholders are adopting a wait-and-see approach to current investment decisions … any shift in trade patterns will take time to materialize — if at all.” Schoeller expects the current situation to calm in the coming months, providing a clearer picture of policies and tariffs, which will allow for a better assessment of market development. Lars Bonnesen, managing director of Germany’s United Heavy Lift (UHL), described the current market as “a bit of a rollercoaster, and it’s quite difficult to prepare for the future with any certainty.” Data from Esgian, the Norwegian shipbroker and maritime consultancy, showed UHL and G2 Ocean were among the MPV operators heavily focused on the US market. Some 68% of UHL’s ocean sailings last year were on US trade lanes, while for G2 Ocean, 51% of sailings were between the US and the East Coast of South America, according an Esgian analysis of route data from last year published in its February market report. Underlying fundamentals still strong Despite the pervasive uncertainty, the MPV fleet remains largely fully employed, with both freight and time charter levels at healthy and sustainable levels. While the sale and purchase market for MPVs is currently experiencing difficulties due to valuation gaps between buyers and sellers, quality tonnage is achieving strong rates on the commercial charter market, offering owners a viable alternative to selling. Looking ahead, MPV operators and owners still anticipate the MSI to be higher in a year’s time, though confidence in the future market environment has waned over the last three MSI editions. Bonnesen mirrored the confidence about longer-term prospects. ”I’m not overly concerned about the current situation,” he said. “All in all, I feel quite confident. On top of that, our order books are pretty full for the next three to four years.” A notable MSI development highlighted by Archard is the unprecedented convergence of regional sentiment. Sentiment in the Americas is described as being in “relative freefall,” while Asian carriers maintain a more positive longer-term outlook. The One World Shipbrokers’ Market Sentiment Index (MSI) averages the responses from an anonymous group of 20 to 30 MPV owners and operators to a set of breakbulk shipping-related questions. A reading of 50 is neutral, indicating a static market, while scores below 50 show pessimism or wariness and scores above 50 indicate optimism. Contact Carly Fields at carly.fields@spglobal.com . Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com.

Maritime

Breakbulk carriers

Heavy-haul transport

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Market ‘unease’ catches up with MPVs amid tariffs, economic uncertainty

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">With the status of a federal multimodal freight network unclear, heavy haulers are forging ahead with their own push for processes, highway improvements and infrastructure specific to the transport of oversized and overweight loads.</div>

With the status of a federal multimodal freight network unclear, heavy haulers are forging ahead with their own push for processes, highway improvements and infrastructure specific to the transport of oversized and overweight loads.

<div class="phx-topic">After a decade of sporadic development, an in-depth federal map of corridors and facilities critical to multimodal freight transport in the US is closer than ever to completion. But it’s unclear whether the map, formally known as the National Multimodal Freight Network, will come to fruition now that its fate is in the hands of the Trump administration.With those efforts in question, heavy haulers with a stake in the multimodal network are forging ahead with their own push for processes, highway improvements and infrastructure specific to the transport of oversized and/or overweight (OS/OW) loads that carry breakbulk and project cargo over land. “The continuing message is: Don’t forget the oversized-overweight segment. If a state is going to be looking at corridors for freight, remember that our industry is out there as well, and we’re going to need some slightly different accommodations on those highway networks,” Chris Smith, transportation vice president for the Specialized Carriers &amp; Rigging Association (SC&amp;RA), told the Journal of Commerce. Creation of the network was scheduled to advance to the final stages this spring, although that timeline was set during the final days of the Biden administration. “I think uncertainty is the word of the day,” Smith said.After failed attempts by the Obama and previous Trump administrations to establish the network, the Biden administration revived those efforts in late 2023. On Jan. 13, a week before Donald Trump took office, the US Department of Transportation published a draft version of its National Multimodal Freight Network map, informed by public comments the department solicited in April 2024. The draft was signed Jan. 6 by Allison Dane Camden, the then-principal deputy assistant secretary for multimodal freight under the US Department of Transportation (US DOT). Camden, who was tapped by the Biden administration to oversee the network’s development, has since left the agency. The US DOT did not respond to a request for comment from the Journal of Commerce. The draft network consists of 175,000 miles of highways, railways and waterways, along with 205 marine ports and airports designated as critical to freight movement and global and domestic supply chains. US DOT opened up the draft for public comments through Feb. 27 with plans to designate the network in spring 2025. Once designated, the network could be used to inform decision-making and investment priorities at the federal, state and local levels.When tying freight corridors to ports, industrial parks and intermodal centers, Smith said both federal and state corridor mapping should factor in the needs of heavy-haul transport.“The economic impact of the things our segment carries far outpaces the volume,” he said. “But there are some special needs that come with that.”<h3>Oversized parking problem</h3>Establishing a network of critical multimodal corridors could help remedy a perennial challenge for heavy-haul truckers — the need for more rest stops that can accommodate oversized loads, as some rest areas restrict them. Smith cited a concerted effort by USDOT to address the shortage of parking for cargo trucks, especially in urban and high-traffic areas. Finding enough space for container trucks and standard-size hauls presents a challenge in and of itself, but factoring in heavy-haul vehicles and loads adds another layer of complexity. “Oversized, overweight permanent loads often run on local and state highways, not on the interstate,” Smith said.” So if all the rest stations are on the interstate, that’s a problem.” John Welch, general manager of heavy-haul and wind operations for Fort Worth-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that developing such a map could help governments pinpoint where to locate rest areas, while giving commercial developers insights into where to build truck stops. “I would hope that would encourage the Flying Js, the Pilots, the larger truck stops to start putting their facilities along those corridors,” he said.Welch said federal mapping could also help government entities prioritize which corridors are in need of improvements. “I think this network would be great, especially if these roads were continually funded by federal grants so they’re constantly being repaired and upgraded,” he said.Preserving the existing corridors that heavy haulers rely on is another concern for OS/OW transporters. Craig McGraw, vice president of sales and marketing for New Jersey-based carrier Trans American Trucking &amp; Warehouse, told the Journal of Commerce that the addition of roundabouts makes it more difficult for oversized loads to maneuver. “All the heavy-haul routes are in place for a reason,” he said. “So our big push was just to keep everything the way it is with that.” Roundabouts can make things particularly challenging when transporting massive components such as wind turbines, Welch said. “A route that would be good for a general 13-axle heavy load would not necessarily be good for the blades,” he said. “We could not get most of our blades into and out of most of the ports around the greater Houston area.” Welch added that he’s seeing larger blades being sent to Corpus Christi and Brownsville instead because that’s where the infrastructure can accommodate them.<h3>States stepping up</h3>Independent of federal efforts to develop mapping for multimodal freight, the heavy-haul segment has made a push over the last decade for improved synchronization among state transportation departments when it comes to OS/OW transport requirements, as well as automated permitting systems for each state. Permitting and regulations vary from state to state, and there are often additional, overlapping requirements set by county and municipal governments. In 2018, SC&amp;RA rolled out an initiative encouraging states to implement an automated system that would make the issuance of permits available electronically 24 hours a day, seven days a week — eliminating the need for human review in most cases. At the time, there were 36 states with some level of automation. Since then, Alaska and Wyoming have joined the ranks, launching fully automated systems in 2024, while Connecticut and Oregon have systems in development, Smith said. “So, we’re down to a handful of states that don’t have it yet,” he said. According to a Journal of Commerce analysis of SC&amp;RA data, only seven states and the District of Columbia have indicated no interest in using an automated permitting system. The states are Alabama, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont. Should the Multimodal Freight Network move forward this spring, states would have a specific role to play in developing it. Each state would have at least 180 days to propose route additions of up to 30% of the total mileage designated in that state. Following US DOT’s April 2024 request for information, the agency received 43 written responses from shippers, carriers, port authorities, state DOT representatives, metropolitan planning organizations, railroads and community interest groups.Among them was the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). On Feb. 25, the association submitted a letter to US DOT Secretary Sean Duffy urging the department to finalize the multimodal network map. “Our supply chains have been tested significantly in recent years, and we strongly advise that the completion of this framework will serve as a vital tool for improving freight transportation infrastructure,” the organization wrote.Regardless of whether the Multimodal Freight Network moves forward, Smith said there are indications that efforts to meet the needs of heavy haulers will continue to advance.“I do think there’s a sense that this administration will ultimately be more friendly to commerce and trade,” he said.Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>.</div>

After a decade of sporadic development, an in-depth federal map of corridors and facilities critical to multimodal freight transport in the US is closer than ever to completion. But it’s unclear whether the map, formally known as the National Multimodal Freight Network, will come to fruition now that its fate is in the hands of the Trump administration. With those efforts in question, heavy haulers with a stake in the multimodal network are forging ahead with their own push for processes, highway improvements and infrastructure specific to the transport of oversized and/or overweight (OS/OW) loads that carry breakbulk and project cargo over land. “The continuing message is: Don’t forget the oversized-overweight segment. If a state is going to be looking at corridors for freight, remember that our industry is out there as well, and we’re going to need some slightly different accommodations on those highway networks,” Chris Smith, transportation vice president for the Specialized Carriers & Rigging Association (SC&RA), told the Journal of Commerce. Creation of the network was scheduled to advance to the final stages this spring, although that timeline was set during the final days of the Biden administration. “I think uncertainty is the word of the day,” Smith said. After failed attempts by the Obama and previous Trump administrations to establish the network, the Biden administration revived those efforts in late 2023. On Jan. 13, a week before Donald Trump took office, the US Department of Transportation published a draft version of its National Multimodal Freight Network map, informed by public comments the department solicited in April 2024. The draft was signed Jan. 6 by Allison Dane Camden, the then-principal deputy assistant secretary for multimodal freight under the US Department of Transportation (US DOT). Camden, who was tapped by the Biden administration to oversee the network’s development, has since left the agency. The US DOT did not respond to a request for comment from the Journal of Commerce. The draft network consists of 175,000 miles of highways, railways and waterways, along with 205 marine ports and airports designated as critical to freight movement and global and domestic supply chains. US DOT opened up the draft for public comments through Feb. 27 with plans to designate the network in spring 2025. Once designated, the network could be used to inform decision-making and investment priorities at the federal, state and local levels. When tying freight corridors to ports, industrial parks and intermodal centers, Smith said both federal and state corridor mapping should factor in the needs of heavy-haul transport. “The economic impact of the things our segment carries far outpaces the volume,” he said. “But there are some special needs that come with that.” Oversized parking problem Establishing a network of critical multimodal corridors could help remedy a perennial challenge for heavy-haul truckers — the need for more rest stops that can accommodate oversized loads, as some rest areas restrict them. Smith cited a concerted effort by USDOT to address the shortage of parking for cargo trucks, especially in urban and high-traffic areas. Finding enough space for container trucks and standard-size hauls presents a challenge in and of itself, but factoring in heavy-haul vehicles and loads adds another layer of complexity. “Oversized, overweight permanent loads often run on local and state highways, not on the interstate,” Smith said.” So if all the rest stations are on the interstate, that’s a problem.” John Welch, general manager of heavy-haul and wind operations for Fort Worth-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that developing such a map could help governments pinpoint where to locate rest areas, while giving commercial developers insights into where to build truck stops. “I would hope that would encourage the Flying Js, the Pilots, the larger truck stops to start putting their facilities along those corridors,” he said. Welch said federal mapping could also help government entities prioritize which corridors are in need of improvements. “I think this network would be great, especially if these roads were continually funded by federal grants so they’re constantly being repaired and upgraded,” he said. Preserving the existing corridors that heavy haulers rely on is another concern for OS/OW transporters. Craig McGraw, vice president of sales and marketing for New Jersey-based carrier Trans American Trucking & Warehouse, told the Journal of Commerce that the addition of roundabouts makes it more difficult for oversized loads to maneuver. “All the heavy-haul routes are in place for a reason,” he said. “So our big push was just to keep everything the way it is with that.” Roundabouts can make things particularly challenging when transporting massive components such as wind turbines, Welch said. “A route that would be good for a general 13-axle heavy load would not necessarily be good for the blades,” he said. “We could not get most of our blades into and out of most of the ports around the greater Houston area.” Welch added that he’s seeing larger blades being sent to Corpus Christi and Brownsville instead because that’s where the infrastructure can accommodate them. States stepping up Independent of federal efforts to develop mapping for multimodal freight, the heavy-haul segment has made a push over the last decade for improved synchronization among state transportation departments when it comes to OS/OW transport requirements, as well as automated permitting systems for each state. Permitting and regulations vary from state to state, and there are often additional, overlapping requirements set by county and municipal governments. In 2018, SC&RA rolled out an initiative encouraging states to implement an automated system that would make the issuance of permits available electronically 24 hours a day, seven days a week — eliminating the need for human review in most cases. At the time, there were 36 states with some level of automation. Since then, Alaska and Wyoming have joined the ranks, launching fully automated systems in 2024, while Connecticut and Oregon have systems in development, Smith said. “So, we’re down to a handful of states that don’t have it yet,” he said. According to a Journal of Commerce analysis of SC&RA data, only seven states and the District of Columbia have indicated no interest in using an automated permitting system. The states are Alabama, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont. Should the Multimodal Freight Network move forward this spring, states would have a specific role to play in developing it. Each state would have at least 180 days to propose route additions of up to 30% of the total mileage designated in that state. Following US DOT’s April 2024 request for information, the agency received 43 written responses from shippers, carriers, port authorities, state DOT representatives, metropolitan planning organizations, railroads and community interest groups. Among them was the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). On Feb. 25, the association submitted a letter to US DOT Secretary Sean Duffy urging the department to finalize the multimodal network map. “Our supply chains have been tested significantly in recent years, and we strongly advise that the completion of this framework will serve as a vital tool for improving freight transportation infrastructure,” the organization wrote. Regardless of whether the Multimodal Freight Network moves forward, Smith said there are indications that efforts to meet the needs of heavy haulers will continue to advance. “I do think there’s a sense that this administration will ultimately be more friendly to commerce and trade,” he said. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Trucking News

Heavy loads at risk from uncertainty around US freight network map

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">A divergence from the weakening container sector has seen the MPV trade hold steady, although the potential for a breakbulk cargo grab by container lines cannot be discounted.</div>

A divergence from the weakening container sector has seen the MPV trade hold steady, although the potential for a breakbulk cargo grab by container lines cannot be discounted.

<div class="phx-topic">Multipurpose ship operators are keeping a weather eye on a demand slump in the competing container ship sector, plummeting container freight rates and an expected deluge of new container ship capacity, fearing it will prompt mode-malleable cargoes to literally jump ship. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6000435_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The container sector is bracing for a notable contraction, echoing challenges not seen since the early days of the pandemic. Multiple factors are contributing to this slump — a slowing economy and slowing retail sales among them. Conversely, the multipurpose/heavy-lift (MPV/HL) sector is eyeing modest growth for 2025, according to exclusive Journal of Commerce analysis, albeit clouded by economic headwinds and regulatory questions. But that growth outlook could diminish if more-than-expected breakbulk cargoes shift to cargo-starved container ships in that forecast period.Seaborne dry cargo trade — a catch-all group that includes dry bulk, dry containerized and general cargo — was expected to grow at an average of just 1% per year to 2026, according to an April 2025 forecast from S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence. This forecast was almost halved from the January 2025 forecast report. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce.<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="7015183f-ea29-4c3b-996a-b9b99d2e80ae"></dynamic-object></div>Container carriers have some tools to manage the influx of newbuildings: the capacity that arrived in the market over the first quarter of 2025 was mitigated by blank sailings, slower steaming and the withdrawal of capacity in terms of idling, according to container sector experts. But as the situation worsens, this may not be enough, and falling container rates could tempt some cargo traditionally moved as breakbulk to containers. With the pressures from competing sectors, MPV/HL rates are expected to soften, although shippers attending the Journal of Commerce’s Breakbulk and Project Cargo Conference last month said they did not expect them to fall off a cliff the way containers have.<h3>Stark order book differences </h3>The broader dynamics within the MPV/HL fleet differ starkly from the container sector. The MPV order book is much more modest and is equivalent to just 9% of the operating fleet, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis. Fleet growth projections are equally restrained at an average 1.7% per year to 2029. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="153f6b09-2be5-4feb-ac85-4667ff36b8c1"></dynamic-object></div>However, there are downsides to the limited ship supply pipeline, too. Shippers speaking to the Journal of Commerce have raised concerns about capacity going forward, especially for project cargo that needs heavy-lift vessels or deck carriers. “Our biggest challenge is capacity — is this going to be sustainable in the future? If you can’t get a space at all, that’s a bigger problem than a rise in fees,” one shipper said.In contrast, the project cargo sector, while not immune to global economic trends, presents a different outlook. Project cargo is for the longer term; there is a steady flow of cargo expected over 2025 as projects that have reached a final investment decision are already looking to charter tonnage. Looming over all sectors has been the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) Section 301 investigation and potential import tariffs on breakbulk and project cargoes. In the latest iteration of the proposed legislation <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scaled-back-ustr-port-tariff-to-hit-chinese-carriers-hardest-5987549">released April 17</a>, the majority of the MPV/HL fleet would escape the proposed fees targeting Chinese shipbuilding and ownership. However, for affected Chinese-owned vessels, costs could be substantial, according to Journal of Commerce calculations. Based on the initial $50 per net ton, the charges range from an average $280,000 to near $990,000 per ship for the open hatch MPVs that are significantly bigger. Still, another shipper cautioned that the USTR Section 301 is “not a done deal” and “does not exist in isolation.” “There is a bigger picture we need to be mindful of,” the source said, pointing to the US Federal Maritime Commission’s <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-probes-ocean-chokepoints-as-trump-looks-to-rule-the-waves-5962937">investigation on global chokepoints</a> as another “one to watch.”Contact Susan Oatway at <a href="mailto:susan.oatway@spglobal.com">susan.oatway@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Multipurpose ship operators are keeping a weather eye on a demand slump in the competing container ship sector, plummeting container freight rates and an expected deluge of new container ship capacity, fearing it will prompt mode-malleable cargoes to literally jump ship. The container sector is bracing for a notable contraction, echoing challenges not seen since the early days of the pandemic. Multiple factors are contributing to this slump — a slowing economy and slowing retail sales among them. Conversely, the multipurpose/heavy-lift (MPV/HL) sector is eyeing modest growth for 2025, according to exclusive Journal of Commerce analysis, albeit clouded by economic headwinds and regulatory questions. But that growth outlook could diminish if more-than-expected breakbulk cargoes shift to cargo-starved container ships in that forecast period. Seaborne dry cargo trade — a catch-all group that includes dry bulk, dry containerized and general cargo — was expected to grow at an average of just 1% per year to 2026, according to an April 2025 forecast from S&P Global Market Intelligence. This forecast was almost halved from the January 2025 forecast report. S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. Container carriers have some tools to manage the influx of newbuildings: the capacity that arrived in the market over the first quarter of 2025 was mitigated by blank sailings, slower steaming and the withdrawal of capacity in terms of idling, according to container sector experts. But as the situation worsens, this may not be enough, and falling container rates could tempt some cargo traditionally moved as breakbulk to containers. With the pressures from competing sectors, MPV/HL rates are expected to soften, although shippers attending the Journal of Commerce’s Breakbulk and Project Cargo Conference last month said they did not expect them to fall off a cliff the way containers have. Stark order book differences The broader dynamics within the MPV/HL fleet differ starkly from the container sector. The MPV order book is much more modest and is equivalent to just 9% of the operating fleet, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis. Fleet growth projections are equally restrained at an average 1.7% per year to 2029. However, there are downsides to the limited ship supply pipeline, too. Shippers speaking to the Journal of Commerce have raised concerns about capacity going forward, especially for project cargo that needs heavy-lift vessels or deck carriers. “Our biggest challenge is capacity — is this going to be sustainable in the future? If you can’t get a space at all, that’s a bigger problem than a rise in fees,” one shipper said. In contrast, the project cargo sector, while not immune to global economic trends, presents a different outlook. Project cargo is for the longer term; there is a steady flow of cargo expected over 2025 as projects that have reached a final investment decision are already looking to charter tonnage. Looming over all sectors has been the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) Section 301 investigation and potential import tariffs on breakbulk and project cargoes. In the latest iteration of the proposed legislation released April 17 , the majority of the MPV/HL fleet would escape the proposed fees targeting Chinese shipbuilding and ownership. However, for affected Chinese-owned vessels, costs could be substantial, according to Journal of Commerce calculations. Based on the initial $50 per net ton, the charges range from an average $280,000 to near $990,000 per ship for the open hatch MPVs that are significantly bigger. Still, another shipper cautioned that the USTR Section 301 is “not a done deal” and “does not exist in isolation.” “There is a bigger picture we need to be mindful of,” the source said, pointing to the US Federal Maritime Commission’s investigation on global chokepoints as another “one to watch.” Contact Susan Oatway at susan.oatway@spglobal.com .

Container sector challenges cast shadow over MPV demand

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">PSA BDP acquired a majority stake in Mexico-based forwarder ED International, expanding PSA’s cross-border forwarding network.</div>

PSA BDP acquired a majority stake in Mexico-based forwarder ED International, expanding PSA’s cross-border forwarding network.

<div class="phx-topic">Logistics provider PSA BDP on Tuesday said it would take a majority stake in a Mexico-based forwarder, strengthening its US cross-border capabilities leveraged with parent PSA International’s global marine terminal network. Terms of the sale of the majority stake in Mexico City-based forwarder ED International were not disclosed. Through its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/psa-leveraging-forwarder-acquisition-to-serve-shippers-directly-5242073">2022 acquisition of BDP International</a>, PSA has positioned the non-vessel-operating common carrier to provide logistics solutions connecting PSA International’s network of 73 marine terminals. “With many shippers continuing the trend of nearshoring from Asia to Mexico, there is a growing need for expanded distribution networks that can provide comprehensive solutions,” PSA BDP said in a statement. Despite US tariffs on Mexican imports of up to 25%, including on finished vehicles, cross-border trade is expected to expand in the long term. Most of that trade is conducted by truck, and in January, the number of northbound trucks headed from Mexico to the US increased 2.8% year over year, with gains in El Paso, Otay Mesa, Nogales, Hildalgo and Eagle Pass, according to the latest US Bureau of Transportation Statistics border-crossing data. Truck traffic into Laredo, Texas, the largest US border crossing, dropped 2% year over year in January, possibly reflecting increased congestion ahead of tariffs that were scheduled to take effect in February. Those tariffs eventually took effect in March but were limited to goods not covered by the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. That means many goods are still moving from Mexico to the US duty-free. Stronger US tariff pressure on China encourages continued manufacturing investment in Mexico to serve North and South America. Direct foreign investment rose 1.1% to US$36.9 billion in 2024, according to preliminary data released earlier this year by Mexico’s Secretaría de Economía (SE). About half of that direct foreign investment came from US companies. In recent years, marine terminals operators, including DP World, have sought to take greater control of landside logistics outside the gates of their facilities. That has manifested through acquisitions of forwarders and even ocean feeder services as in the case of DP World. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  </div>

Logistics provider PSA BDP on Tuesday said it would take a majority stake in a Mexico-based forwarder, strengthening its US cross-border capabilities leveraged with parent PSA International’s global marine terminal network. Terms of the sale of the majority stake in Mexico City-based forwarder ED International were not disclosed. Through its 2022 acquisition of BDP International , PSA has positioned the non-vessel-operating common carrier to provide logistics solutions connecting PSA International’s network of 73 marine terminals. “With many shippers continuing the trend of nearshoring from Asia to Mexico, there is a growing need for expanded distribution networks that can provide comprehensive solutions,” PSA BDP said in a statement. Despite US tariffs on Mexican imports of up to 25%, including on finished vehicles, cross-border trade is expected to expand in the long term. Most of that trade is conducted by truck, and in January, the number of northbound trucks headed from Mexico to the US increased 2.8% year over year, with gains in El Paso, Otay Mesa, Nogales, Hildalgo and Eagle Pass, according to the latest US Bureau of Transportation Statistics border-crossing data. Truck traffic into Laredo, Texas, the largest US border crossing, dropped 2% year over year in January, possibly reflecting increased congestion ahead of tariffs that were scheduled to take effect in February. Those tariffs eventually took effect in March but were limited to goods not covered by the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. That means many goods are still moving from Mexico to the US duty-free. Stronger US tariff pressure on China encourages continued manufacturing investment in Mexico to serve North and South America. Direct foreign investment rose 1.1% to US$36.9 billion in 2024, according to preliminary data released earlier this year by Mexico’s Secretaría de Economía (SE). About half of that direct foreign investment came from US companies. In recent years, marine terminals operators, including DP World, have sought to take greater control of landside logistics outside the gates of their facilities. That has manifested through acquisitions of forwarders and even ocean feeder services as in the case of DP World. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com . 

Forwarding

Port infrastructure

North American ports

Marine terminals

Port-focused US logistics provider takes majority stake in Mexican forwarder

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

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Wide Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE

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 MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on the first year of any annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Wide Box

Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Wide Box

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

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

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

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

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

Upgrade Subscription

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on first year of any annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Offer Box

Subscribe Today

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Offer Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription! 

Upgrade Subscription - Offer Box

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

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

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The latest container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage includes the movement of containerized cargo handled by marine terminals and container ports, depots, container lines, drayage, consignees, importers and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers. The Journal of Commerce's container shipping news includes news from the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South America trades, and intra-Asia trades.

Asia-Europe

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

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News shipping | 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

Port News

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

Top 100 Importer/Exporter Rankings: Largest US shippers outpace hot market

Market ‘unease’ catches up with MPVs amid tariffs, economic uncertainty

Heavy loads at risk from uncertainty around US freight network map