<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Reports of cancelled Asia to North America ocean bookings are a sharp reversal from just a few weeks ago, when shippers were looking to accelerate shipments through the supply chain to replenish inventories depleted due to the prolonged China shutdown.</div>

Reports of cancelled Asia to North America ocean bookings are a sharp reversal from just a few weeks ago, when shippers were looking to accelerate shipments through the supply chain to replenish inventories depleted due to the prolonged China shutdown.

3631676_FI.jpg

<div>Cargo owners are increasingly reducing and postponing ocean shipments from China to North America, according to forwarders, a trend that suggests the anticipated surge of inbound cargoes will be short-lived as the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curbs consumer demand.The change is a sharp reversal from just a few weeks ago when <a>shippers were looking to accelerate shipments</a> through the supply chain to replenish inventories depleted due to the prolonged China shutdown.With US retailers temporarily closing stores and US business activity in March experiencing <a>the steepest decline since 2009</a>, according to IHS Markit indices, shippers are seeking to...

Cargo owners are increasingly reducing and postponing ocean shipments from China to North America, according to forwarders, a trend that suggests the anticipated surge of inbound cargoes will be short-lived as the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) curbs consumer demand. The change is a sharp reversal from just a few weeks ago when shippers were looking to accelerate shipments through the supply chain to replenish inventories depleted due to the prolonged China shutdown. With US retailers temporarily closing stores and US business activity in March experiencing the steepest decline since 2009 , according to IHS Markit indices, shippers are seeking to delay goods in transit by keeping them on the water for longer periods of time, in part by diverting them to longer transit times, forwarders told JOC.com. IHS Markit is the parent company of JOC.com. Shipments are still arriving in North America, but there are signs that some retailers are accepting fewer additional goods into their distribution centers. That’s raising questions as to where unloaded imported containers will go, how depleted the chassis supply will become at key gateways such as Los Angeles and Long Beach, and how carriers will handle detention fees if containers can’t be returned within typical seven- to 10-day free-time windows. “I am starting to learn of some PO [purchase order] cancellations, and PO pushback. Whereas two weeks ago people were asking for the fastest transit, now you are starting to see customers trying to delay POs. For stuff that is already produced and has to get into a container to get it off the factory floor, customers are looking to delay it with a longer transit time,” Kurt McElroy, executive vice president of Apex Maritime, told JOC.com. “It’s almost a 180-degree turn; you couldn’t get it here fast enough, and now you want to slow it down. It’s amazing how quickly things can change.” According to Flexport, approximately 20 percent of bookings have been postponed and/or reduced at request of the consignee, up from 10 percent under “normal” circumstances, largely due shippers delaying ship loadings because the cargo isn’t available from the factory yet. “Over the past few weeks, amendments were made because the supplier wasn't ready, but now it’s because the consignee is postponing or reducing orders,” Sanne Manders, chief operating officer at Flexport, told JOC.com Prioritizing COVID-19 response The cancellations and postponements are uneven across commodity groups. Unsurprisingly, products tied to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency response, such as medical supplies or specific consumer items prioritized by Amazon and online retailers, are seeing strong demand. Comparatively, orders for discretionary merchandise such as toys or apparel are being canceled or postponed. “Unless it’s a necessity, it’s either not moving or being pushed back,” Jon Monroe, a consultant to forwarders and non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) told JOC.com Tuesday. Monroe said factories in south China that recently picked up production and were planning to export their products are suddenly experiencing cancellations. “It’s the toys and products like that. Until we get the demand side going, that’s what we will see,” he said. A shipping executive Tuesday outlined a similar dynamic. On one hand, he cited two national retailers that had canceled orders from suppliers and are refusing to accept shipments. On the other hand, he cited a medical supply company that is increasing its bookings. As a result, it is still too early to draw hard-and-fast conclusions about overall container shipping demand. David Bennett, president of the Americas at Globe Express Services, said one customer canceled his 11 containers that were scheduled for booking this week, but business from shippers of apparel, furniture, and lighting were still “solid.” An industry consultant and former logistics director at a national retailer cautioned not to generalize about demand even within the same product category. For example, an importer of apparel that is seeing it’s too late to get items for the spring-summer season may be canceling bookings that couldn’t be shipped two months ago because of factory shutdowns in China, whereas an importer of fall apparel would be unlikely to cancel his bookings. And on the eastbound side, some forwarders said bookings are holding. An executive from one of the five largest forwarders serving the trans-Pacific trade, who asked not to be identified, said “ocean cargo is showing a smooth increase.” He added a more pressing concern is whether drayage drivers would be able to deliver goods to US warehouses, as operators close or reduce shifts and delivery windows shrink. Detention and demurrage pinch? Monroe predicted there will be increasing demand for warehouse space in major gateways in Southern California and the US Southeast, as retailers that are already receiving shipments must find storage facilities because sales are dropping. “Then the detention and demurrage issues will arise,” he said, referring to how a scarcity in off-dock storage space may prevent truckers from picking up cargo and returning equipment on behalf of their shipper owners, thus incurring penalties. Another forwarder who asked to remain anonymous said he has not seen a great deal of cancellations right now, but is concerned that a number of orders for back-to-school and holiday merchandise due to be shipped this summer will be canceled. The US and global economies are already falling into recession , with forecasts being revised on the fly as the pandemic spreads around the world, putting an end to a 10-year US economic expansion, according to IHS Markit chief economist Nariman Behravesh. “If consumer confidence doesn’t pick up, I think there is going to be a serious lull,” he said. McElroy pointed to what could be a growing crisis in Southern California as major retailers refuse delivery of imported goods, idling containers, and the chassis they’re sitting on. “The issue is going to become where to put the containers because the big box retailers all of a sudden don’t want to take delivery from the numerous importing suppliers. What are you going to do with them? There is no place to put this stuff, either because their own warehouse is full, or the receiving warehouse is closed due to lockdown,” McElroy said. “[If] you have a container on the terminal on a chassis, with no place to unload it, or if they can pull it out of the terminal, you may find it sitting on a chassis in a parking lot for weeks. You don’t have enough chassis in Southern California to handle the volume that is coming unless you have the chassis being returned to the network. It’s going to be an interesting thing to watch, as it’s completely unprecedented.”

Container lines

North American importers cutting, delaying Asian cargo: forwarders

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Sarah McCoy, who recently led the renegotiation of the lease for the Virginia International Gateway terminal, will lead the sixth-largest port in the US by volume. </div>

Sarah McCoy, who recently led the renegotiation of the lease for the Virginia International Gateway terminal, will lead the sixth-largest port in the US by volume.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">A 12-year veteran of the Virginia Port Authority who led the renegotiation of the lease at one of the most advanced marine terminals in the country, has officially taken the reins of the sixth-largest US container port by volume. Sarah McCoy on Wednesday was named CEO of the Port of Virginia after serving as interim CEO and executive director since January. She replaces Stephen Edwards, who stepped down last November. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6215876_0.1.jpg"></img></div>“We have the infrastructure, people and performance to continue defining the future of American trade, and that’s exactly what we’re going to do,” McCoy said in a statement. “I look forward to putting these advantages to work to attract business to Virginia and continue delivering for our customers and communities across Virginia.” McCoy led VPA’s renegotiation of its lease for the Virginia International Gateway through 2065 with owner Alinda Capital Partners. She was also key in the port’s recent $1.4 billion investment plan that included the late February <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/virginias-deeper-harbor-could-allow-higher-usage-on-ulcvs-6189706">completion of the deepening of Norfolk’s harbor to 55 feet</a>. McCoy was VPA’s general counsel from 2017-2022 and then served as chief administrative officer. Laden container volumes through the port in 2025 fell 4.2% year over year, to 2.4 million TEUs, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Comparatively, volume through the US East Coast overall increased 3.2%. <a href="mailto:News@joc.com">News@joc.com</a></div>

A 12-year veteran of the Virginia Port Authority who led the renegotiation of the lease at one of the most advanced marine terminals in the country, has officially taken the reins of the sixth-largest US container port by volume. Sarah McCoy on Wednesday was named CEO of the Port of Virginia after serving as interim CEO and executive director since January. She replaces Stephen Edwards, who stepped down last November. “We have the infrastructure, people and performance to continue defining the future of American trade, and that’s exactly what we’re going to do,” McCoy said in a statement. “I look forward to putting these advantages to work to attract business to Virginia and continue delivering for our customers and communities across Virginia.” McCoy led VPA’s renegotiation of its lease for the Virginia International Gateway through 2065 with owner Alinda Capital Partners. She was also key in the port’s recent $1.4 billion investment plan that included the late February completion of the deepening of Norfolk’s harbor to 55 feet . McCoy was VPA’s general counsel from 2017-2022 and then served as chief administrative officer. Laden container volumes through the port in 2025 fell 4.2% year over year, to 2.4 million TEUs, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Comparatively, volume through the US East Coast overall increased 3.2%. News@joc.com

Port News

North American ports

Marine terminals

Maritime

VPA veteran McCoy tapped as CEO of Port of Virginia

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Local 23 says marine clerk jobs will be eliminated if Husky Terminal uses container-tracking technology within the terminal yard, despite the fact its use has been widespread at West Coast terminals for decades without jobs being lost. </div>

Local 23 says marine clerk jobs will be eliminated if Husky Terminal uses container-tracking technology within the terminal yard, despite the fact its use has been widespread at West Coast terminals for decades without jobs being lost.

<div class="phx-topic">A local of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) in Tacoma is attempting to block Husky Terminal from installing container-tracking technology on its gantry cranes, saying the move would eliminate union jobs. The complaint from ILWU Local 23 comes despite the fact the technology has been in widespread use at marine terminals along the West Coast since it was written into a coastwide contract approved in 2002. At issue is the use of what’s known as optical character recognition, or OCRs, which record container numbers as the boxes are lifted off vessels. The numbers are paired with information relayed by radio frequency identification devices (RFDs) that track container movements in the yard. Before computerization, that information was manually inputted by ILWU marine clerks. The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents terminal operators in negotiating and managing the coastwide collective bargaining agreements, says the use of OCRs and RFDs has significantly enhanced the efficiency of port operations. “West Coast ports have lost substantial market share to competing ports in Canada and on the Gulf and East coasts,” the PMA said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce. “Failing to keep pace with modern cargo-handling practices not only drives cargo and market share to competing ports, but also puts longshore jobs – as well as jobs throughout the supply chain – at risk.” ILWU Local 23 has been seeking signatures on a petition that claims union jobs at Husky are at risk over the OCR technology. “ILWU Local 23 is raising community awareness that the Port of Tacoma is considering allowing its tenant, Husky Terminal, to install technology on publicly owned port gantry cranes that will eliminate jobs for longshore marine clerks,” Local 23 President Jared Faker said in a statement. <h3>Number of marine clerks at Tacoma has increased </h3>The PMA said the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ilwu-braces-for-technology-5264642">2002 ILWU-PMA contract</a> that was ratified by the union specifically allows the use of computerization in return for management concessions that protect the interests of marine clerks. “Those contract provisions also provide ILWU clerks and other ILWU members with a wide range of job protections, including guaranteed pay,” the PMA said. The number of registered marine clerks in Tacoma has actually increased from 90 in the summer of 2002 to 133 as of December 2025, a gain of 48%, according to the PMA. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

A local of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) in Tacoma is attempting to block Husky Terminal from installing container-tracking technology on its gantry cranes, saying the move would eliminate union jobs. The complaint from ILWU Local 23 comes despite the fact the technology has been in widespread use at marine terminals along the West Coast since it was written into a coastwide contract approved in 2002. At issue is the use of what’s known as optical character recognition, or OCRs, which record container numbers as the boxes are lifted off vessels. The numbers are paired with information relayed by radio frequency identification devices (RFDs) that track container movements in the yard. Before computerization, that information was manually inputted by ILWU marine clerks. The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents terminal operators in negotiating and managing the coastwide collective bargaining agreements, says the use of OCRs and RFDs has significantly enhanced the efficiency of port operations. “West Coast ports have lost substantial market share to competing ports in Canada and on the Gulf and East coasts,” the PMA said in a statement to the Journal of Commerce. “Failing to keep pace with modern cargo-handling practices not only drives cargo and market share to competing ports, but also puts longshore jobs – as well as jobs throughout the supply chain – at risk.” ILWU Local 23 has been seeking signatures on a petition that claims union jobs at Husky are at risk over the OCR technology. “ILWU Local 23 is raising community awareness that the Port of Tacoma is considering allowing its tenant, Husky Terminal, to install technology on publicly owned port gantry cranes that will eliminate jobs for longshore marine clerks,” Local 23 President Jared Faker said in a statement. Number of marine clerks at Tacoma has increased The PMA said the 2002 ILWU-PMA contract that was ratified by the union specifically allows the use of computerization in return for management concessions that protect the interests of marine clerks. “Those contract provisions also provide ILWU clerks and other ILWU members with a wide range of job protections, including guaranteed pay,” the PMA said. The number of registered marine clerks in Tacoma has actually increased from 90 in the summer of 2002 to 133 as of December 2025, a gain of 48%, according to the PMA. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at  bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Tacoma ILWU local attempting to block Husky technology effort

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The crackdown on more than 150 onshore wind farms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. </div>

The crackdown on more than 150 onshore wind farms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry.

<div class="phx-topic">Wind project cargo activity is facing yet another setback after over 150 onshore wind developments in the US were put on hold by the Trump administration. Citing national security concerns, the Department of Defense <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/04/climate/wind-power-delays-trump-pentagon.html">has stalled approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects</a> located on private lands, the administration’s latest push against wind energy development. The inactivity could have repercussions for the breakbulk sector, as the wind industry represents an important source of project cargo. The lion’s share of those shipments is for the onshore wind industry, which accounted for more than 90% of global wind turbine orders in 2025 despite an 18% year-over-year decline, according to data from S&amp;P Global Energy. John Welch, senior director of heavy-haul operations for Fort Worth, Texas-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that cargo transportation for the wind industry depends on a predictable project pipeline, as the moves often call for complex logistics work. “Transporting the major wind components requires significant advance planning, specialized equipment, routing, permitting, escorts, crews, and considerable coordination,” he said. “And that is just the transportation portion.” Welch said national security reviews are important, and that any legitimate concerns should be addressed through the appropriate process. However, “At the same time, delays or uncertainty in project approvals can ripple through the logistics and supply chain, making it more difficult for transportation providers and their customers to plan efficiently and responsibly,” he said. Among the stalled projects are wind farms that were awaiting final signoff, others in mid-negotiation, and projects that typically do not require federal oversight, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/74d8cf6f-aa17-4a24-a621-e26b1bad2e1e?syn-25a6b1a6=1">the Financial Times reported</a>, citing the American Clean Power Association (ACP) and sources close to the matter. Jason Grumet, ACP’s CEO, told the Journal of Commerce that efforts to delay onshore projects contradict calls from senior federal officials for permitting reform while “abusing the current permitting system.”  “The core idea of permitting reform is that America wins when we can modernize all critical infrastructure,” Grumet said. “It’s incoherent to pursue that goal while actively blockading domestic energy production that will help meet our growing energy needs and keeping energy affordable for American families.” <h3>Wind supply chain recalibrates </h3>The crackdown on onshore windfarms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. On March 23, French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a deal to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/offshore-wind-cancellations-set-up-energy-project-pivot-in-the-us-6192787">accept $1 billion from the US government to cancel its two offshore wind projects</a> — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to developing fossil fuel facilities. And in February, the Trump administration began taking steps to reverse a sweep of court victories allowing construction to resume on five offshore wind projects the administration has tried to stop. The slowdown of US wind farm development over the past couple of years has forced heavy-haul transport specialist Art Espaillat to suspend operations of his onshore wind logistics consultancy, as many of his competitors lowered their rates when project developers pulled back. “It just created a race to the bottom for a lot of companies like mine,” Espaillat told the Journal of Commerce. Espaillat said many of the US wind projects he has worked on over the past six years had already secured agreements with utilities to supply power to the grid, only to reach a standstill because of federal permitting delays. “They’re setting up roadblocks that not a lot of other industries are getting,” he said. With fewer turbines in need of transport, comparably sized data center components have been eating up the available heavy-haul capacity, Espaillat said. But if those stalled wind projects were to pick back up again in another two years, the industry could face a scenario similar to the challenges that played out in 2020 when the global wind industry’s rapid expansion created supply chain bottlenecks for turbines and components. “Developers lost a lot of money because there weren’t enough trucks, not enough ships, and it was too much too fast,” Espaillat said. “Executing in a scenario like that is very expensive and chaotic.” Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>.</div>

Wind project cargo activity is facing yet another setback after over 150 onshore wind developments in the US were put on hold by the Trump administration. Citing national security concerns, the Department of Defense has stalled approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects located on private lands, the administration’s latest push against wind energy development. The inactivity could have repercussions for the breakbulk sector, as the wind industry represents an important source of project cargo. The lion’s share of those shipments is for the onshore wind industry, which accounted for more than 90% of global wind turbine orders in 2025 despite an 18% year-over-year decline, according to data from S&P Global Energy. John Welch, senior director of heavy-haul operations for Fort Worth, Texas-based Lone Star Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce that cargo transportation for the wind industry depends on a predictable project pipeline, as the moves often call for complex logistics work. “Transporting the major wind components requires significant advance planning, specialized equipment, routing, permitting, escorts, crews, and considerable coordination,” he said. “And that is just the transportation portion.” Welch said national security reviews are important, and that any legitimate concerns should be addressed through the appropriate process. However, “At the same time, delays or uncertainty in project approvals can ripple through the logistics and supply chain, making it more difficult for transportation providers and their customers to plan efficiently and responsibly,” he said. Among the stalled projects are wind farms that were awaiting final signoff, others in mid-negotiation, and projects that typically do not require federal oversight, the Financial Times reported , citing the American Clean Power Association (ACP) and sources close to the matter. Jason Grumet, ACP’s CEO, told the Journal of Commerce that efforts to delay onshore projects contradict calls from senior federal officials for permitting reform while “abusing the current permitting system.”  “The core idea of permitting reform is that America wins when we can modernize all critical infrastructure,” Grumet said. “It’s incoherent to pursue that goal while actively blockading domestic energy production that will help meet our growing energy needs and keeping energy affordable for American families.” Wind supply chain recalibrates The crackdown on onshore windfarms marks the latest push by the Trump administration to dismantle the US wind industry. On March 23, French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a deal to accept $1 billion from the US government to cancel its two offshore wind projects — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to developing fossil fuel facilities. And in February, the Trump administration began taking steps to reverse a sweep of court victories allowing construction to resume on five offshore wind projects the administration has tried to stop. The slowdown of US wind farm development over the past couple of years has forced heavy-haul transport specialist Art Espaillat to suspend operations of his onshore wind logistics consultancy, as many of his competitors lowered their rates when project developers pulled back. “It just created a race to the bottom for a lot of companies like mine,” Espaillat told the Journal of Commerce. Espaillat said many of the US wind projects he has worked on over the past six years had already secured agreements with utilities to supply power to the grid, only to reach a standstill because of federal permitting delays. “They’re setting up roadblocks that not a lot of other industries are getting,” he said. With fewer turbines in need of transport, comparably sized data center components have been eating up the available heavy-haul capacity, Espaillat said. But if those stalled wind projects were to pick back up again in another two years, the industry could face a scenario similar to the challenges that played out in 2020 when the global wind industry’s rapid expansion created supply chain bottlenecks for turbines and components. “Developers lost a lot of money because there weren’t enough trucks, not enough ships, and it was too much too fast,” Espaillat said. “Executing in a scenario like that is very expensive and chaotic.” Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Energy projects

Breakbulk News

US onshore wind halt deals latest blow for project cargo

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Logistics and transportation veterans decried Amazon’s announcement this week that it is offering bundled supply chain services as merely a repackaging of current capabilities; others weren’t as quick to dismiss it. </div>

Logistics and transportation veterans decried Amazon’s announcement this week that it is offering bundled supply chain services as merely a repackaging of current capabilities; others weren’t as quick to dismiss it.

<div class="phx-topic">Amazon’s launch this week of a suite of supply chain services for shippers not currently using its e-commerce seller ecosystem has sparked a healthy debate within the logistics industry about whether the services represent a threat to third-party logistics providers (3PLs). On one side of that debate are mostly transportation and logistics veterans who suggest the announcement is primarily marketing — a neat and more digestible packaging of offerings that Amazon has long provided as individual services, such as warehousing, fulfillment, and brokered and for-hire transportation. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6215654_0.1.jpg"></img></div>On the other side are those who think Amazon’s foray into diversified logistics is taking shape in a way that threatens everyone from integrators such as UPS and FedEx to mom-and-pop forwarders and freight brokers to supply chain software vendors. “I’m laughing at all the ‘oohs’ and ‘aahs’ over something that is essentially just a marketing ploy,” Eric Williams, CEO of freight brokerage pricing vendor Beagl and a former transportation executive with Target, wrote on X. In a response to a question posted on X about whether Amazon had just “knee-capped” the forwarder Flexport, its CEO Ryan Petersen replied: “No, they’ve had this offering for many years.” One longtime logistics veteran who did not want to be identified described the announcement to the Journal of Commerce as “Groundhog Day,” given that it felt familiar. <h3>‘Execution engine’ </h3>Still, there are certainly watchers of the supply chain space who assert that Amazon’s move is more than just a repackaging of existing capabilities. “Amazon has built a fully integrated execution engine,” Brittain Ladd, a former Amazon executive and prolific analyst of the retail, supply chain and technology space, said in a LinkedIn post. “Not a platform. Not software. An integrated execution engine that also includes robotics and automation.” Ladd said sources within Amazon believe the company will be able to save third-party shippers a sizable percentage over what they might be paying now by using current combinations of transportation, contract logistics, final mile, and software partners. “I don’t care how long a 3PL has done business with a customer,” he said. “When customers learn that Amazon can reduce their costs ... and transition their logistics needs into Amazon’s ecosystem with minimal disruption, they will choose Amazon.” Or will they? This type of offering has been tried by large retailers before. Walmart in the late 2000s toyed with the idea of offering third-party contract logistics services to other shippers, but the idea never gained enough traction to grow into a substantial business unit. More recently, American Eagle Outfitters cut bait on a third-party logistics venture designed to attract other shippers. It’s hard to pinpoint how and why these ventures didn’t succeed, but some part of it is attributable to the reticence of shippers to use competitors as logistics partners. <h3>Competitor tension </h3>Amazon is a different beast than American Eagle and even Walmart, but some of that competitive tension will surely remain. Although Amazon noted in its announcement that retail customers such as Lands’ End and, ironically, American Eagle, are existing users of its supply chain services, it’s hard to imagine retailers that compete directly with Amazon’s e-commerce business engaging in a massive migration to its logistics offering. Some commenters made the link between the announcement Monday of Amazon Supply Chain Services (ASCS) and the wildly successful Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud infrastructure business. Surely, the branding team at Amazon would love for ACSC to become as synonymous with logistics as AWS has become with cloud. In business circles, the much-loved trope is that Amazon takes its biggest cost centers and eventually turns them into revenue drivers. But is logistics like other parts of its business? Amazon has long blended the digital and physical worlds, but the fragmentation of freight transportation across modes is much more challenging than what it has faced in parcel or web hosting or even warehousing and fulfillment. Take, for example, Amazon’s non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVO) business. That unit is big enough to be the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/journal-of-commerce-top-25-trans-pacific-nvos-in-2025-6182176">seventh-largest trans-Pacific NVO</a>, according to data from S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence, but it is not in any way dominant. <h3>Domestic focus </h3>What’s more, the announcement Monday suggests Amazon’s focus is largely on domestic services — brokerage, drayage, warehousing, final-mile, inventory management, and distribution. Within each of those categories, Amazon will contend with a set of competitors that range from large, diversified, and often well-capitalized players, to the normal cohort of smaller providers. Given the highly fragmented nature of logistics on the whole, and even within each subcategory, this will be a test of whether Amazon’s technological might and huge scale will overpower businesses that focus on people-to-people relationships first and foremost. The not-so-small matter of which shippers might be reluctant to turn over the keys to their supply chains to a company that has become famously dominant in e-commerce, fulfillment and web services overlaps with the fragmentation issue. Competitors in each service category will also be split into ones that cater to many shipper verticals and ones that focus on single verticals. In the announcement, Amazon specifically mentioned automotive, healthcare, electronics, apparel &amp; beauty, and food &amp; beverage, as key verticals it would target. Some of those verticals can be neatly split into manufacturer and retailer segments. Are retailers ready to give Amazon intricate information on their supplier networks or customs information? Or will Amazon find more joy in targeting upstream suppliers within the retail industry, or larger shippers in the industrial sector? <h3>‘Base load’ benefits </h3>Aside from just generating more revenue from its decade of investment in third-party logistics, the benefit to Amazon bundling its services is clear: By providing what one LinkedIn commenter called a “base load“ of third-party cargo across various modes, Amazon could essentially subsidize or even zero out the cost of moving its own freight. That “own” freight could take the form of volume from third-party sellers already on Amazon’s e-commerce platform or its own products that Amazon moves as an outright shipper itself. That’s a target worth chasing for a company with the scale and reach of Amazon. And it would give them yet another lever to distance themselves from competition across the various categories in which it participates. That even includes AWS, where it is competing with Google and Microsoft to collect monetizable logistics industry information. Still... “This is not like AWS,” Dave Ross, chief strategy officer of less-than-truckload carrier Roadrunner and a former equities analyst, wrote on LinkedIn. “There is no ‘move to the cloud’ when it comes to freight. Amazon is adding no new capacity. [It] just wants to be a middleman to replace your current middleman. I’ll take the ‘under’ on its overall impact to the transportation &amp; logistics industry after hype and headlines pass.” Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Amazon’s launch this week of a suite of supply chain services for shippers not currently using its e-commerce seller ecosystem has sparked a healthy debate within the logistics industry about whether the services represent a threat to third-party logistics providers (3PLs). On one side of that debate are mostly transportation and logistics veterans who suggest the announcement is primarily marketing — a neat and more digestible packaging of offerings that Amazon has long provided as individual services, such as warehousing, fulfillment, and brokered and for-hire transportation. On the other side are those who think Amazon’s foray into diversified logistics is taking shape in a way that threatens everyone from integrators such as UPS and FedEx to mom-and-pop forwarders and freight brokers to supply chain software vendors. “I’m laughing at all the ‘oohs’ and ‘aahs’ over something that is essentially just a marketing ploy,” Eric Williams, CEO of freight brokerage pricing vendor Beagl and a former transportation executive with Target, wrote on X. In a response to a question posted on X about whether Amazon had just “knee-capped” the forwarder Flexport, its CEO Ryan Petersen replied: “No, they’ve had this offering for many years.” One longtime logistics veteran who did not want to be identified described the announcement to the Journal of Commerce as “Groundhog Day,” given that it felt familiar. ‘Execution engine’ Still, there are certainly watchers of the supply chain space who assert that Amazon’s move is more than just a repackaging of existing capabilities. “Amazon has built a fully integrated execution engine,” Brittain Ladd, a former Amazon executive and prolific analyst of the retail, supply chain and technology space, said in a LinkedIn post. “Not a platform. Not software. An integrated execution engine that also includes robotics and automation.” Ladd said sources within Amazon believe the company will be able to save third-party shippers a sizable percentage over what they might be paying now by using current combinations of transportation, contract logistics, final mile, and software partners. “I don’t care how long a 3PL has done business with a customer,” he said. “When customers learn that Amazon can reduce their costs ... and transition their logistics needs into Amazon’s ecosystem with minimal disruption, they will choose Amazon.” Or will they? This type of offering has been tried by large retailers before. Walmart in the late 2000s toyed with the idea of offering third-party contract logistics services to other shippers, but the idea never gained enough traction to grow into a substantial business unit. More recently, American Eagle Outfitters cut bait on a third-party logistics venture designed to attract other shippers. It’s hard to pinpoint how and why these ventures didn’t succeed, but some part of it is attributable to the reticence of shippers to use competitors as logistics partners. Competitor tension Amazon is a different beast than American Eagle and even Walmart, but some of that competitive tension will surely remain. Although Amazon noted in its announcement that retail customers such as Lands’ End and, ironically, American Eagle, are existing users of its supply chain services, it’s hard to imagine retailers that compete directly with Amazon’s e-commerce business engaging in a massive migration to its logistics offering. Some commenters made the link between the announcement Monday of Amazon Supply Chain Services (ASCS) and the wildly successful Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud infrastructure business. Surely, the branding team at Amazon would love for ACSC to become as synonymous with logistics as AWS has become with cloud. In business circles, the much-loved trope is that Amazon takes its biggest cost centers and eventually turns them into revenue drivers. But is logistics like other parts of its business? Amazon has long blended the digital and physical worlds, but the fragmentation of freight transportation across modes is much more challenging than what it has faced in parcel or web hosting or even warehousing and fulfillment. Take, for example, Amazon’s non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVO) business. That unit is big enough to be the seventh-largest trans-Pacific NVO , according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence, but it is not in any way dominant. Domestic focus What’s more, the announcement Monday suggests Amazon’s focus is largely on domestic services — brokerage, drayage, warehousing, final-mile, inventory management, and distribution. Within each of those categories, Amazon will contend with a set of competitors that range from large, diversified, and often well-capitalized players, to the normal cohort of smaller providers. Given the highly fragmented nature of logistics on the whole, and even within each subcategory, this will be a test of whether Amazon’s technological might and huge scale will overpower businesses that focus on people-to-people relationships first and foremost. The not-so-small matter of which shippers might be reluctant to turn over the keys to their supply chains to a company that has become famously dominant in e-commerce, fulfillment and web services overlaps with the fragmentation issue. Competitors in each service category will also be split into ones that cater to many shipper verticals and ones that focus on single verticals. In the announcement, Amazon specifically mentioned automotive, healthcare, electronics, apparel & beauty, and food & beverage, as key verticals it would target. Some of those verticals can be neatly split into manufacturer and retailer segments. Are retailers ready to give Amazon intricate information on their supplier networks or customs information? Or will Amazon find more joy in targeting upstream suppliers within the retail industry, or larger shippers in the industrial sector? ‘Base load’ benefits Aside from just generating more revenue from its decade of investment in third-party logistics, the benefit to Amazon bundling its services is clear: By providing what one LinkedIn commenter called a “base load“ of third-party cargo across various modes, Amazon could essentially subsidize or even zero out the cost of moving its own freight. That “own” freight could take the form of volume from third-party sellers already on Amazon’s e-commerce platform or its own products that Amazon moves as an outright shipper itself. That’s a target worth chasing for a company with the scale and reach of Amazon. And it would give them yet another lever to distance themselves from competition across the various categories in which it participates. That even includes AWS, where it is competing with Google and Microsoft to collect monetizable logistics industry information. Still... “This is not like AWS,” Dave Ross, chief strategy officer of less-than-truckload carrier Roadrunner and a former equities analyst, wrote on LinkedIn. “There is no ‘move to the cloud’ when it comes to freight. Amazon is adding no new capacity. [It] just wants to be a middleman to replace your current middleman. I’ll take the ‘under’ on its overall impact to the transportation & logistics industry after hype and headlines pass.” Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Supply chain

Amazon’s 3PL foray: marketing ploy or existential threat to 3PLs?

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Rates to the US East Coast and Europe are down by as much as $500 per FEU in recent weeks as ocean carriers look to lift volumes that softened in April.</div>

Rates to the US East Coast and Europe are down by as much as $500 per FEU in recent weeks as ocean carriers look to lift volumes that softened in April.

<div class="phx-topic">Ocean rates out of India to the US and Europe have weakened in recent weeks as carriers face an uncertain demand environment amid geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges. Spot booking rates from West India to the US East Coast have fallen $400 to $500 per FEU from late-April levels, an analysis of new data collected by the Journal of Commerce from local freight forwarders indicates. Forwarder sources have pegged spot pricing by lead European carriers for loads from Nhava Sheva to New York at between $2,200 and $2,500 per FEU, while reporting even lower quotes of $2,000 to $2,200 from Asian liners. Sources say most India-USEC carriers have extended current short-term contract rates for bookings through May after abandoning rate increase plans for April and early May. But carriers continue to file fresh rate increase notices on the trade lane, including two separate hikes of $1,000 per container now planned by Hapag-Lloyd for May 15 and June 1. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, assessed India-USEC spot rates at $1,950 per FEU as of May 5, marking a 10% week-over-week decline. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="893ffa5c-0a69-45c7-a555-425e44318711"></dynamic-object></div>Similarly, on the India-Europe trade lane, active carriers have pushed rates lower by up to $500 per FEU over the past two weeks in an effort to lift volumes as close as possible to their declared space allocations. Rates from Nhava Sheva to Felixstowe/London Gateway/Rotterdam now stand at about $2,000 per FEU, the analysis shows. Despite tactical price adjustments, cargo liftings for some of the recent West India-USEC/North Europe sailings have been lighter, with average capacity utilization near 70%, down from the 80% to 90% level normally fulfilled and/or targeted by carriers, according to the sources. Forwarders generally believe the rate pressure will persist through the second quarter, which is traditionally a slack period for Indian exports following the fiscal year-end rush in March. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ae1df54b-4003-46b5-a8c3-e0d35707e941"></dynamic-object></div>Apart from that seasonal factor, carriers’ heightened sales efforts to pick up additional volumes from India to compensate for the lack of or limited availability of transshipment cargo out of the Middle East hubs have contributed to the downward rate shift, liner executives agree. “There has been a 20% bump in our Indian westbound allocations for the USEC since the Middle East war,” a sales executive at a major European liner told the Journal of Commerce. “We are also seeing consistent sailings across major services, so there is no pricing opportunity to gain from blanked capacity.” Corroborating that, industry data points to only two void calls across five India-USEC connections operated by Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM and Maersk in the week 19 to 23 period. Data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce, shows Indian exports to the US East Coast jumped more than 20% in March from February, to 73,540 TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com</a>.</div>

Ocean rates out of India to the US and Europe have weakened in recent weeks as carriers face an uncertain demand environment amid geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges. Spot booking rates from West India to the US East Coast have fallen $400 to $500 per FEU from late-April levels, an analysis of new data collected by the Journal of Commerce from local freight forwarders indicates. Forwarder sources have pegged spot pricing by lead European carriers for loads from Nhava Sheva to New York at between $2,200 and $2,500 per FEU, while reporting even lower quotes of $2,000 to $2,200 from Asian liners. Sources say most India-USEC carriers have extended current short-term contract rates for bookings through May after abandoning rate increase plans for April and early May. But carriers continue to file fresh rate increase notices on the trade lane, including two separate hikes of $1,000 per container now planned by Hapag-Lloyd for May 15 and June 1. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, assessed India-USEC spot rates at $1,950 per FEU as of May 5, marking a 10% week-over-week decline. Similarly, on the India-Europe trade lane, active carriers have pushed rates lower by up to $500 per FEU over the past two weeks in an effort to lift volumes as close as possible to their declared space allocations. Rates from Nhava Sheva to Felixstowe/London Gateway/Rotterdam now stand at about $2,000 per FEU, the analysis shows. Despite tactical price adjustments, cargo liftings for some of the recent West India-USEC/North Europe sailings have been lighter, with average capacity utilization near 70%, down from the 80% to 90% level normally fulfilled and/or targeted by carriers, according to the sources. Forwarders generally believe the rate pressure will persist through the second quarter, which is traditionally a slack period for Indian exports following the fiscal year-end rush in March. Apart from that seasonal factor, carriers’ heightened sales efforts to pick up additional volumes from India to compensate for the lack of or limited availability of transshipment cargo out of the Middle East hubs have contributed to the downward rate shift, liner executives agree. “There has been a 20% bump in our Indian westbound allocations for the USEC since the Middle East war,” a sales executive at a major European liner told the Journal of Commerce. “We are also seeing consistent sailings across major services, so there is no pricing opportunity to gain from blanked capacity.” Corroborating that, industry data points to only two void calls across five India-USEC connections operated by Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM and Maersk in the week 19 to 23 period. Data from PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce, shows Indian exports to the US East Coast jumped more than 20% in March from February, to 73,540 TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com .

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

Container Shipping News

Indian westbound rates under pressure amid demand uncertainty, overcapacity

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

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

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland26

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 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.

Trans-Atlantic

Trans-Pacific

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

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

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

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

VPA veteran McCoy tapped as CEO of Port of Virginia

Tacoma ILWU local attempting to block Husky technology effort

US onshore wind halt deals latest blow for project cargo