<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">China World Trade Centre is reaching for the sky as the day of its completion draws nearer. </div>

China World Trade Centre is reaching for the sky as the day of its completion draws nearer.

<div>China World Trade Centre is reaching for the sky as the day of its completion draws nearer.The new center will become a showcase for China, many Westerners say, as government officials and traders seek to host more international trade and economic forums.China's formidable Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade, known as Mofert, is behind the US$380 million project. The ministry's consultancy unit is a 50-50 partner in the 20-year joint venture with Kerry Industrial Co. of Hong Kong.The latter is a subsidiary of Singapore-based Kuok Group, a property developer that owns the Shangri-la chain of up-market hotels.Financing of the...

China World Trade Centre is reaching for the sky as the day of its completion draws nearer. The new center will become a showcase for China, many Westerners say, as government officials and traders seek to host more international trade and economic forums.China's formidable Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade, known as Mofert, is behind the US$380 million project. The ministry's consultancy unit is a 50-50 partner in the 20-year joint venture with Kerry Industrial Co. of Hong Kong. The latter is a subsidiary of Singapore-based Kuok Group, a property developer that owns the Shangri-la chain of up-market hotels. Financing of the project is being led by the Bank of China with 22 foreign banks participating in the loans. The center is the largest and most comprehensive property project in China, according to Ang Keng Lam, Singaporean executive director of the consortium. Some 5,000 people are on the site - adjacent to Beijing's main business district and one of its two diplomatic areas - working round-the-clock to finish construction next year, James Pitchon told The Journal of Commerce. Mr. Pitchon is marketing manager and chief representative of the property firm Richard Ellis, a leasing agent for the center. The project has an international flavor due to the parties involved, including the main contractor Societe Auxiliarie d'Enterprises of France, principal project architect and engineer Nikken Sekkei Ltd. of Japan and China's First Engineering Bureau of Building Construction. When complete, the trade center will offer the nation's capital a convention center, first-class hotels of 740 and 300 rooms, exhibition area, two 30-story office blocks and two apartment towers for expatriate residents. The residential wing will offer 448 one-, two- and three-bedroom units, each with a balcony, complemented by shopping and other services. A gym, pool and health center are on the site, along with tennis, squash and bowling. Banquet and convention facilities include 32 meeting rooms for up to 380 people, a banquet hall for 1,100 and a main meeting hall for 2,000. The exhibition center covers 75,000 square feet on two levels. Trade shows in Beijing are now held mainly in three exhibition halls, while conferences often are located in a handful of major hotels. The property market in Beijing has gone from everyone being based in older hotels to joint-venture hotels and office blocks, Mr. Pitchon said. Now, it's moving up to international standards, he said. China is badly in need of both exhibition and conference facilities and better housing for the increasing number of expatriates its government hopes to attract. The only similar project is in Shanghai, where Portman Cos. of Atlanta and New York-based American International Group Inc. are putting up a $170 million trade center on a 200,000-square-foot site. It is due to open late this year, a few months ahead of Beijing's.

Maritime

WORLD TRADE CENTER TAKES SHAPE IN CHINA

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The alignment between demand and the supply of capacity has individual dynamics across each trade lane and different consequences for the newbuild, second-hand and charter markets, writes Jeremy Masters. </div>

The alignment between demand and the supply of capacity has individual dynamics across each trade lane and different consequences for the newbuild, second-hand and charter markets, writes Jeremy Masters.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">When a linkage is made between trade conditions and capacity evolution, there is a tendency to focus exclusively on the big ship trades. The reality is that the alignment between demand and supply of space has individual dynamics across each trade lane and different consequences for the newbuild, second-hand and charter markets. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6225328_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The big ship trades are predominantly inhabited by carrier-owned tonnage or long-term charters that often go back-to-back with non-operating owners (NOOs) making newbuild orders. Suffice it to say there is not a heavily traded short-term charter market. Alphaliner’s May monthly monitor reported that there was a staggering 91.4 % increase of the existing fleet in newbuild orders for 18,000 to 24,000-TEU ships. It’s very tough to see that amount of capacity being successfully absorbed by an expansion of trades using big ships, slow-steaming and retaining southern Africa routings if the Red Sea fully opens. Scrapping is not relevant in this tier or indeed in the next two or three size tiers down due to the youth of the fleet. There are, of course, trades where existing loops can be upgraded – Far East to Europe being the most obvious – but if a trade already has a fragile balance, there will be a limit to absorption levels and cascading will potentially export oversupply contagion. <h3>Smaller trades, different dynamics </h3>If we switch to short-sea, regional, and smaller deep-sea trades, we enter a different set of dynamics. To illustrate the stark differences, we can look at the versatile 2,000 to 5,099-TEU capacity category. It’s not just a case where these size ships fit the weekly volumes being generated, but also the capability of the ports served to take the ship sizes and turn them around quickly. In looking at why this ship size has been in such high demand and charter rates so robust, we can look at natural trade strength in a number of the feeder/regional trades they inhabit, such as intra-Asia, but structural issues are also at play: Carriers chartering and buying a tremendous amount of tonnage from NOOs to run their own regional/feeder systems. New deployments created to overcome disruption to normal ship systems, like the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz. Congestion consistently reducing networking capacity. Gemini Cooperation’s hub-and-spoke system, for instance, increased demand for smaller tonnage but did not necessarily maximize usage of those assets. Unlike a nimble third- party feeder specialist who would swap sizes, adapt schedules and get enough carrier clients on board to fill ships on an ongoing basis, Gemini is by design running a fixed set of connections forcing it to sail its spoke ships on time at whatever utilization is possible with Gemini-only cargo. That’s not to question the business logic of vertical integration for the carriers. The combined effect of new ship systems being created and not maximizing the use of assets is, however, greater demand at a time the reduction of NOO tonnage has created inelasticity and high prices in both the charter and second-hand market. <h3>Newbuild fracture </h3>What seems counterintuitive in the smaller trades where demand is high, second-hand ships are hard to come by, and charter rates are extremely robust, is that the newbuild order book is considerably lower than in the big-ship categories. Alphaliner’s May monthly monitor reported the following percentages of the existing fleet on newbuild orders: 2,000 to 2,999 TEUs (12.8%), 3000 to 3,999 TEUs (35.7%), and 4000 to 5,099 TEUs (16.9%). These percentages have been moving up in recent months, but are a quantum leap below the 89.4 % in the 18,000 to 24,000-TEU range. According to Sea-web, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, some 2.43 million TEUs were on order in 2025 for ships of 15,001 TEUs and up. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="fdc6bd37-a5e0-4c29-abde-4be9dbd2ba3e"></dynamic-object></div>Have carriers and NOO’s overcooked their orders in the big ships and undercooked them at the lower end? The answer on the big ships looks to be “yes,” and there is a built-in carrier driver for this : There is not a well-populated second-hand or short-term charter market for newer, bigger ships, so if you need energy-efficient, low-slot cost vessels to be competitive in particular trades going forward, there is a pressure to order even if you have overcapacity concerns. There is a simpler and more pervasive explanation: The move from three major east-west networks ( 2M, Ocean, THEA ) to four ( MSC, Ocean, Gemini, Premier) catalyzed an arms race that continues today and will only be resolved by further carrier and/or consortium consolidation. Jeremy Masters is managing director of Shipping Masters. Contact him at <a href="mailto:jeremy@shippingmastershk.com">jeremy@shippingmastershk.com</a>. </div>

When a linkage is made between trade conditions and capacity evolution, there is a tendency to focus exclusively on the big ship trades. The reality is that the alignment between demand and supply of space has individual dynamics across each trade lane and different consequences for the newbuild, second-hand and charter markets. The big ship trades are predominantly inhabited by carrier-owned tonnage or long-term charters that often go back-to-back with non-operating owners (NOOs) making newbuild orders. Suffice it to say there is not a heavily traded short-term charter market. Alphaliner’s May monthly monitor reported that there was a staggering 91.4 % increase of the existing fleet in newbuild orders for 18,000 to 24,000-TEU ships. It’s very tough to see that amount of capacity being successfully absorbed by an expansion of trades using big ships, slow-steaming and retaining southern Africa routings if the Red Sea fully opens. Scrapping is not relevant in this tier or indeed in the next two or three size tiers down due to the youth of the fleet. There are, of course, trades where existing loops can be upgraded – Far East to Europe being the most obvious – but if a trade already has a fragile balance, there will be a limit to absorption levels and cascading will potentially export oversupply contagion. Smaller trades, different dynamics If we switch to short-sea, regional, and smaller deep-sea trades, we enter a different set of dynamics. To illustrate the stark differences, we can look at the versatile 2,000 to 5,099-TEU capacity category. It’s not just a case where these size ships fit the weekly volumes being generated, but also the capability of the ports served to take the ship sizes and turn them around quickly. In looking at why this ship size has been in such high demand and charter rates so robust, we can look at natural trade strength in a number of the feeder/regional trades they inhabit, such as intra-Asia, but structural issues are also at play: Carriers chartering and buying a tremendous amount of tonnage from NOOs to run their own regional/feeder systems. New deployments created to overcome disruption to normal ship systems, like the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz. Congestion consistently reducing networking capacity. Gemini Cooperation’s hub-and-spoke system, for instance, increased demand for smaller tonnage but did not necessarily maximize usage of those assets. Unlike a nimble third- party feeder specialist who would swap sizes, adapt schedules and get enough carrier clients on board to fill ships on an ongoing basis, Gemini is by design running a fixed set of connections forcing it to sail its spoke ships on time at whatever utilization is possible with Gemini-only cargo. That’s not to question the business logic of vertical integration for the carriers. The combined effect of new ship systems being created and not maximizing the use of assets is, however, greater demand at a time the reduction of NOO tonnage has created inelasticity and high prices in both the charter and second-hand market. Newbuild fracture What seems counterintuitive in the smaller trades where demand is high, second-hand ships are hard to come by, and charter rates are extremely robust, is that the newbuild order book is considerably lower than in the big-ship categories. Alphaliner’s May monthly monitor reported the following percentages of the existing fleet on newbuild orders: 2,000 to 2,999 TEUs (12.8%), 3000 to 3,999 TEUs (35.7%), and 4000 to 5,099 TEUs (16.9%). These percentages have been moving up in recent months, but are a quantum leap below the 89.4 % in the 18,000 to 24,000-TEU range. According to Sea-web, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, some 2.43 million TEUs were on order in 2025 for ships of 15,001 TEUs and up. Have carriers and NOO’s overcooked their orders in the big ships and undercooked them at the lower end? The answer on the big ships looks to be “yes,” and there is a built-in carrier driver for this : There is not a well-populated second-hand or short-term charter market for newer, bigger ships, so if you need energy-efficient, low-slot cost vessels to be competitive in particular trades going forward, there is a pressure to order even if you have overcapacity concerns. There is a simpler and more pervasive explanation: The move from three major east-west networks ( 2M, Ocean, THEA ) to four ( MSC, Ocean, Gemini, Premier) catalyzed an arms race that continues today and will only be resolved by further carrier and/or consortium consolidation. Jeremy Masters is managing director of Shipping Masters. Contact him at jeremy@shippingmastershk.com .

Container lines

Asia-Europe

Evolution of ocean capacity linked to varied dynamics of trade needs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Project shippers in the US are being encouraged to test the robustness of bridge strength and state permitting feasibility up to a year in advance of major cargo moves.</div>

Project shippers in the US are being encouraged to test the robustness of bridge strength and state permitting feasibility up to a year in advance of major cargo moves.

<div class="phx-topic">Project cargo shippers in the US are being urged to submit “dummy permits” to periodically test bridge and state permitting feasibility to avoid last-minute surprises on the volatile final leg of a cargo move. As project cargo lands at ports or prepares to exit fabrication facilities, the margin for error shrinks to zero. Yet, this is where permitting roadblocks can see multi-million-dollar projects grind to a halt. James Weston, senior project logistics manager at engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) company Linde Engineering, believes a proactive, structural shift in how shippers approach route planning would avoid last-minute surprises. Weston suggested shippers should implement an internal permit feasibility assessment process that routinely submits dummy permits up to a year in advance for major projects. "Let's apply for a permit a year in advance... route studies will give you the feasibility for infrastructure challenges and things of that nature, but it doesn't tell you if you're going to be able to get under that bridge,” he said. “It doesn't tell you if the states can even allow you to go down that route." Weston added that spending a fraction of the budget upfront acts as cheap insurance against liquid damages. ”I can mitigate a challenge a year in advance a lot easier than I can 20 days out,” he said. Deep fragmentation within permitting infrastructure in the US means that project cargo carriers frequently face situations where a route approved by one state becomes a compliance headache at the neighboring border. Craig McGraw, vice president of sales and marketing at freight service provider Trans American Trucking &amp; Warehouse, said that local infrastructure updates can instantly derail execution. ”We’ve had cases where we go to a facility, we have our truck ready, and then, because of construction delays, the permit we previously applied for is invalid,” McGraw said. To solve this, McGraw and other members of the international trade association Specialized Carriers and Rigging Association (SCRA) routinely lobby in Washington, D.C., pushing for "permit harmonization in different regions of the US, to move things along quicker," he said. Ragan Watson, who handles project sales at lifting specialist Barnhart, echoed the need to bridge the disconnect between carriers and state regulators. Barnhart utilizes annual SCRA events to present upcoming project portfolios directly to officials from roughly 45 permit offices. ”We (say), ‘These are the projects that we’re encountering in your area... What are the issues you’re envisioning that already could be something that we can gird against?” Watson said. <h3>Equipment challenge must be overcome </h3>Even the most meticulous permit planning cannot overcome a lack of physical equipment. The executives highlighted a pressing need for strategic, long-term asset acquisition rather than reactive buying during market spikes. Watson warned against rushing out to "buy more picks and shovels when there's a gold rush," urging project owners to abandon traditional short-term tendering. Instead, he suggested that shippers provide a project list “for the next three to five years" so asset-owning suppliers can justify capital expenditures to their executives. This long-term visibility is particularly vital given the explosive growth of data centers across the US, which is fundamentally reshaping market capacity. McGraw pointed out that the massive scale of data center components is forcing specialized carriers to procure highly specific trailers. "From what we're understanding that's going to be going on for the next 10 years... companies are going out and buying trailers specific to this," he said. Yet, without guaranteed contracts, acquiring those expensive assets is a gamble that "can kind of come back to bite you in the end," he added. The executives agreed that overcoming last-mile friction requires an aggressive educational outreach campaign directed at cargo owners, procurement teams, and engineers who may suffer from a "curse of knowledge" or a complete lack of operational awareness. ”I think that education of the freight owners is vital,” Weston said, advising logistics professionals to hold training sessions across corporate silos so that engineering and procurement teams understand the physical limitations of transport. Joye Runfola, director of supply chain and logistics for the Americas at industrial gas manufacturer Chart Industries, summarized the reality facing today’s supply chains. ”If it’s going to go wrong, it’s going to go wrong at the end,” she said. Contact Carly Fields at <a href="mailto:carly.fields@spglobal.com">carly.fields@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Project cargo shippers in the US are being urged to submit “dummy permits” to periodically test bridge and state permitting feasibility to avoid last-minute surprises on the volatile final leg of a cargo move. As project cargo lands at ports or prepares to exit fabrication facilities, the margin for error shrinks to zero. Yet, this is where permitting roadblocks can see multi-million-dollar projects grind to a halt. James Weston, senior project logistics manager at engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) company Linde Engineering, believes a proactive, structural shift in how shippers approach route planning would avoid last-minute surprises. Weston suggested shippers should implement an internal permit feasibility assessment process that routinely submits dummy permits up to a year in advance for major projects. "Let's apply for a permit a year in advance... route studies will give you the feasibility for infrastructure challenges and things of that nature, but it doesn't tell you if you're going to be able to get under that bridge,” he said. “It doesn't tell you if the states can even allow you to go down that route." Weston added that spending a fraction of the budget upfront acts as cheap insurance against liquid damages. ”I can mitigate a challenge a year in advance a lot easier than I can 20 days out,” he said. Deep fragmentation within permitting infrastructure in the US means that project cargo carriers frequently face situations where a route approved by one state becomes a compliance headache at the neighboring border. Craig McGraw, vice president of sales and marketing at freight service provider Trans American Trucking & Warehouse, said that local infrastructure updates can instantly derail execution. ”We’ve had cases where we go to a facility, we have our truck ready, and then, because of construction delays, the permit we previously applied for is invalid,” McGraw said. To solve this, McGraw and other members of the international trade association Specialized Carriers and Rigging Association (SCRA) routinely lobby in Washington, D.C., pushing for "permit harmonization in different regions of the US, to move things along quicker," he said. Ragan Watson, who handles project sales at lifting specialist Barnhart, echoed the need to bridge the disconnect between carriers and state regulators. Barnhart utilizes annual SCRA events to present upcoming project portfolios directly to officials from roughly 45 permit offices. ”We (say), ‘These are the projects that we’re encountering in your area... What are the issues you’re envisioning that already could be something that we can gird against?” Watson said. Equipment challenge must be overcome Even the most meticulous permit planning cannot overcome a lack of physical equipment. The executives highlighted a pressing need for strategic, long-term asset acquisition rather than reactive buying during market spikes. Watson warned against rushing out to "buy more picks and shovels when there's a gold rush," urging project owners to abandon traditional short-term tendering. Instead, he suggested that shippers provide a project list “for the next three to five years" so asset-owning suppliers can justify capital expenditures to their executives. This long-term visibility is particularly vital given the explosive growth of data centers across the US, which is fundamentally reshaping market capacity. McGraw pointed out that the massive scale of data center components is forcing specialized carriers to procure highly specific trailers. "From what we're understanding that's going to be going on for the next 10 years... companies are going out and buying trailers specific to this," he said. Yet, without guaranteed contracts, acquiring those expensive assets is a gamble that "can kind of come back to bite you in the end," he added. The executives agreed that overcoming last-mile friction requires an aggressive educational outreach campaign directed at cargo owners, procurement teams, and engineers who may suffer from a "curse of knowledge" or a complete lack of operational awareness. ”I think that education of the freight owners is vital,” Weston said, advising logistics professionals to hold training sessions across corporate silos so that engineering and procurement teams understand the physical limitations of transport. Joye Runfola, director of supply chain and logistics for the Americas at industrial gas manufacturer Chart Industries, summarized the reality facing today’s supply chains. ”If it’s going to go wrong, it’s going to go wrong at the end,” she said. Contact Carly Fields at carly.fields@spglobal.com .

Heavy-haul transport

Breakbulk News

‘Dummy permits’ could overcome last-mile snafus for project cargoes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Shanghai-based carrier has launched two new services connecting Asia to the Middle East as the Persian Gulf trade corridor presents strong green shoots of capacity demand amid ongoing mainline service disruptions.</div>

The Shanghai-based carrier has launched two new services connecting Asia to the Middle East as the Persian Gulf trade corridor presents strong green shoots of capacity demand amid ongoing mainline service disruptions.

<div class="phx-topic">Emerging regional carrier CU Lines, formerly China United Lines, is rapidly consolidating its network operations, riding on a string of vessel charters it has snapped up as a result of Singapore-based <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fsealead-warns-of-network-disruptions-in-persian-gulf-war-zone-6199099&amp;data=05%7C02%7Ckevin.saville2%40spglobal.com%7C9365140523594abb902308deb734a18b%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C639149633885888591%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=ITgBHvs7LI4eHjk9ppWhFX%2BxCkWHJudG%2FkgBGoScsAA%3D&amp;reserved=0">SeaLead’s service terminations and exit from certain markets.</a>CU has now launched two new services connecting Asia to the Middle East as the Persian Gulf trade corridor presents strong green shoots of capacity demand amid ongoing mainline service disruptions. A fleet of four ships, including the 10,000-TEU Express Berlin that CU Lines took over from SeaLead, has been deployed on a standalone China-Middle East Express (CGX) loop, with stops in India and Pakistan. The full CGX rotation is Qingdao, Shanghai, Ningbo, Shekou, Nansha, Port Klang, Mundra, Karachi, Sohar, Khor Fakkan and Qingdao. CU Lines noted that shippers on the trade lane have an opportunity to experience consistent sailings and better schedule reliability due to the use of “well-conditioned” tonnage. “Leveraging its existing REX Red Sea Express service, AEM Asia-East Mediterranean service and regional feeder network, CU Lines will provide customers with a Middle East service portfolio featuring direct priority services and diversified transport routes, aiming to ensure smooth supply chains,” the Shanghai-based liner said. Additionally, CU has opened dedicated shuttle operations on a rotation of Shanghai, Nansha, Khor Fakkan, and Shanghai in conjunction with Hong Kong-based T.S. Lines. Khor Fakkan and Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates and Sohar in Oman have become the contingency supply chain support for Middle East cargo flows hobbled by the war in the Middle East. <h3>Intra-Asia growth </h3>CU Lines also continues its growth in the intra-Asia market. The carrier recently joined a consortium led by Singapore-based X-Press Feeders for enhanced Southeast Asia-Indian subcontinent coverage. The joint service deploys three ships from X-Press Feeders and one vessel from CU Lines, ranging between 3,000 TEUs to 5,000 TEUs, with T.S. Lines as another consortium partner through a slot charter deal. More network expansion for CU Lines appears imminent as local industry sources with knowledge of the matter say the carrier has agreed to take over approximately 65,000 TEUs of capacity previously operated by SeaLead, which they estimate equates to between 20 to 25 vessel charter transactions. ”Six charter parties for the switchovers have already been concluded, while formalities for the rest of the plans are progressing,” said an industry source who didn’t want to be identified. India-Persian Gulf trades had already seen the entry of <a href="https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.joc.com%2Farticle%2Fopportunistic-regional-lines-rush-to-middle-east-corridor-amid-mainliner-pause-6193412&amp;data=05%7C02%7Ckevin.saville2%40spglobal.com%7C9365140523594abb902308deb734a18b%7C8f3e36ea80394b4081a77dc0599e8645%7C1%7C0%7C639149633885935739%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=QOxNEJcFLBtbTnJ5tIo8dc9tRInjzi2fx7bFJbW2Y10%3D&amp;reserved=0">several other opportunistic ocean capacity participants</a>, driven by the allure of record-high freight yields. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com.</a></div>

Emerging regional carrier CU Lines, formerly China United Lines, is rapidly consolidating its network operations, riding on a string of vessel charters it has snapped up as a result of Singapore-based SeaLead’s service terminations and exit from certain markets. CU has now launched two new services connecting Asia to the Middle East as the Persian Gulf trade corridor presents strong green shoots of capacity demand amid ongoing mainline service disruptions. A fleet of four ships, including the 10,000-TEU Express Berlin that CU Lines took over from SeaLead, has been deployed on a standalone China-Middle East Express (CGX) loop, with stops in India and Pakistan. The full CGX rotation is Qingdao, Shanghai, Ningbo, Shekou, Nansha, Port Klang, Mundra, Karachi, Sohar, Khor Fakkan and Qingdao. CU Lines noted that shippers on the trade lane have an opportunity to experience consistent sailings and better schedule reliability due to the use of “well-conditioned” tonnage. “Leveraging its existing REX Red Sea Express service, AEM Asia-East Mediterranean service and regional feeder network, CU Lines will provide customers with a Middle East service portfolio featuring direct priority services and diversified transport routes, aiming to ensure smooth supply chains,” the Shanghai-based liner said. Additionally, CU has opened dedicated shuttle operations on a rotation of Shanghai, Nansha, Khor Fakkan, and Shanghai in conjunction with Hong Kong-based T.S. Lines. Khor Fakkan and Fujairah in the United Arab Emirates and Sohar in Oman have become the contingency supply chain support for Middle East cargo flows hobbled by the war in the Middle East. Intra-Asia growth CU Lines also continues its growth in the intra-Asia market. The carrier recently joined a consortium led by Singapore-based X-Press Feeders for enhanced Southeast Asia-Indian subcontinent coverage. The joint service deploys three ships from X-Press Feeders and one vessel from CU Lines, ranging between 3,000 TEUs to 5,000 TEUs, with T.S. Lines as another consortium partner through a slot charter deal. More network expansion for CU Lines appears imminent as local industry sources with knowledge of the matter say the carrier has agreed to take over approximately 65,000 TEUs of capacity previously operated by SeaLead, which they estimate equates to between 20 to 25 vessel charter transactions. ”Six charter parties for the switchovers have already been concluded, while formalities for the rest of the plans are progressing,” said an industry source who didn’t want to be identified. India-Persian Gulf trades had already seen the entry of several other opportunistic ocean capacity participants , driven by the allure of record-high freight yields. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com.

Port News

International ports

Container Shipping News

CU Lines’ network expansion gives fresh capacity influx into Middle East trades

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Justice Department indictments against four of the world’s biggest box manufacturers follow reciprocal port fees and tariffs on China-made port equipment.</div>

Justice Department indictments against four of the world’s biggest box manufacturers follow reciprocal port fees and tariffs on China-made port equipment.

<div class="phx-topic">The US Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) indictment of four of the world’s largest ocean shipping container makers and seven of their senior executives marks the latest US-China supply chain-linked row that has previously included tit-for-tat port fees and tariffs on China-made port equipment. It also follows earlier <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmcs-bentzel-cautions-on-china-dominance-in-chassis-container-supply-5249125">US warnings about China’s dominance in container and chassis manufacturing</a> that led one of the indicted companies to drop its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cimc-maersk-drop-reefer-deal-after-doj-warning-5222824">planned $987 million acquisition of Maersk’s refrigerated container production business</a> in 2022 after the DOJ raised a red flag on the deal. DOJ, in an indictment unsealed Tuesday, accused the parties of engaging in a price-fixing and production-limiting conspiracy from November 2019 to at least January 2024. The companies indicted are China International Marine Containers (CIMC), the world’s largest container manufacturer; Cosco Shipping Development’s container-making subsidiary Shanghai Universal Logistics Equipment Company, which controls Dong Fang International Containers; CXIC Group Containers Company; and Hong Kong’s Singamas Container (Holdings). The executives targeted include CIMC President Mai Boliang and former vice president Huang Tianhua Huang, and Singamas CEO and Chairman Teo Siong Seng. “The multi-year conspiracy roughly doubled the prices of standard shipping containers between 2019 and 2021, increasing the container manufacturers’ profits approximately one hundredfold during the COVID-19 pandemic and global supply chain crisis,” the DOJ said in a statement. Chinese container manufacturers produce arbout 95% of the world’s dry freight containers, according to maritime consultancy Drewry. The DOJ said one executive, Singamas marketing director Vick Nam Hing Ma, was arrested in France last month and his extradition to the US is pending. The six other co-defendants remain at large. The Justice Department did not say whether it had approached other jurisdictions, including Hong Kong and Singapore, where Singamas CEO Teo normally lives, seeking the arrest of the other executives. In separate statements to the Hong Kong stock exchange Wednesday, both CIMC and Singamas said they were aware the DOJ had issued criminal antitrust charges against them and company executives. But they both said that neither the companies nor their executives had been served with any legal documentation from the DOJ. Singamas added that it had “engaged external legal advisers,” while CIMC said it “will closely monitor and respond proactively.” Both companies said business operations and day-to-day activities remain normal. Dong Fang, Cosco Shipping Development and CXIC did not immediately comment. <h3>Companies allegedly agreed on production cap </h3>In details about the alleged conspiracy, the DOJ said executives from CIMC, Dong Fang, and CXIC, as well as an alleged unnamed co-conspirator, met at CIMC’s headquarters in Shenzhen in November 2019. The executives allegedly agreed to four measures limiting output of dry freight containers, including restricting the number of shifts and hours each factory worked, installing surveillance cameras on all production lines to ensure the agreed-upon limitations were not exceeded, and not building any new container-making factories. DOJ alleges the executives later refined the pact to restrict how many dry containers the companies would manufacture for particular customers, including container lessors, shipping lines and logistics companies in the US, Europe, China and elsewhere, while also capping total container production. “Global price-fixing cartels strike at the heart of our economic liberty,” Omeed Assefi, DOJ’s acting assistant attorney general, said in the statement. “The defendants held hostage the world’s supply of ocean shipping containers during the COVID pandemic when our supply chains needed it the most.” The indictments come just one week after US President Donald Trump traveled to China for meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Washington and Beijing have also been at odds over the past year regarding what the US sees as <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cosco-halts-balboa-calls-in-latest-twist-over-panama-port-row-6185309">China’s outsized influence in Panama Canal operations</a>, with that coming amid the wider trade spat that saw the US imposing tariffs on China-made products and Beijing responding in kind. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

The US Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) indictment of four of the world’s largest ocean shipping container makers and seven of their senior executives marks the latest US-China supply chain-linked row that has previously included tit-for-tat port fees and tariffs on China-made port equipment. It also follows earlier US warnings about China’s dominance in container and chassis manufacturing that led one of the indicted companies to drop its planned $987 million acquisition of Maersk’s refrigerated container production business in 2022 after the DOJ raised a red flag on the deal. DOJ, in an indictment unsealed Tuesday, accused the parties of engaging in a price-fixing and production-limiting conspiracy from November 2019 to at least January 2024. The companies indicted are China International Marine Containers (CIMC), the world’s largest container manufacturer; Cosco Shipping Development’s container-making subsidiary Shanghai Universal Logistics Equipment Company, which controls Dong Fang International Containers; CXIC Group Containers Company; and Hong Kong’s Singamas Container (Holdings). The executives targeted include CIMC President Mai Boliang and former vice president Huang Tianhua Huang, and Singamas CEO and Chairman Teo Siong Seng. “The multi-year conspiracy roughly doubled the prices of standard shipping containers between 2019 and 2021, increasing the container manufacturers’ profits approximately one hundredfold during the COVID-19 pandemic and global supply chain crisis,” the DOJ said in a statement. Chinese container manufacturers produce arbout 95% of the world’s dry freight containers, according to maritime consultancy Drewry. The DOJ said one executive, Singamas marketing director Vick Nam Hing Ma, was arrested in France last month and his extradition to the US is pending. The six other co-defendants remain at large. The Justice Department did not say whether it had approached other jurisdictions, including Hong Kong and Singapore, where Singamas CEO Teo normally lives, seeking the arrest of the other executives. In separate statements to the Hong Kong stock exchange Wednesday, both CIMC and Singamas said they were aware the DOJ had issued criminal antitrust charges against them and company executives. But they both said that neither the companies nor their executives had been served with any legal documentation from the DOJ. Singamas added that it had “engaged external legal advisers,” while CIMC said it “will closely monitor and respond proactively.” Both companies said business operations and day-to-day activities remain normal. Dong Fang, Cosco Shipping Development and CXIC did not immediately comment. Companies allegedly agreed on production cap In details about the alleged conspiracy, the DOJ said executives from CIMC, Dong Fang, and CXIC, as well as an alleged unnamed co-conspirator, met at CIMC’s headquarters in Shenzhen in November 2019. The executives allegedly agreed to four measures limiting output of dry freight containers, including restricting the number of shifts and hours each factory worked, installing surveillance cameras on all production lines to ensure the agreed-upon limitations were not exceeded, and not building any new container-making factories. DOJ alleges the executives later refined the pact to restrict how many dry containers the companies would manufacture for particular customers, including container lessors, shipping lines and logistics companies in the US, Europe, China and elsewhere, while also capping total container production. “Global price-fixing cartels strike at the heart of our economic liberty,” Omeed Assefi, DOJ’s acting assistant attorney general, said in the statement. “The defendants held hostage the world’s supply of ocean shipping containers during the COVID pandemic when our supply chains needed it the most.” The indictments come just one week after US President Donald Trump traveled to China for meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Washington and Beijing have also been at odds over the past year regarding what the US sees as China’s outsized influence in Panama Canal operations , with that coming amid the wider trade spat that saw the US imposing tariffs on China-made products and Beijing responding in kind. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Supply chain

US move against container makers is latest entry in logistics battle with China

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">CEO Eli Glickman did not offer earnings guidance due to the pending merger with Hapag-Lloyd, but said the war-driven surge in oil prices will likely drag Zim’s results down further in the second quarter. </div>

CEO Eli Glickman did not offer earnings guidance due to the pending merger with Hapag-Lloyd, but said the war-driven surge in oil prices will likely drag Zim’s results down further in the second quarter.

<div class="phx-topic">Zim Integrated Shipping Services on Wednesday reported a first-quarter loss and 30% decline in revenues, citing a “softer” freight environment that pulled rates and volumes lower. The ocean carrier said the two-month surge in global bunker fuel prices due to the war in the Middle East could make an even bigger impact on its second-quarter results. Israel-based Zim recorded a diluted per-share loss of 71 cents for the quarter. That compares with an analyst consensus forecast of a $1.37 per share loss, according to Capital IQ Estimates, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Total first-quarter revenue of $1.3 billion was down 30% from a year earlier. Operational results worsened in the quarter. Zim said its average first-quarter freight rate of $1,310 per TEU was down 26%, while total volume of 866,000 TEUs was 8% lower. “Our first-quarter results were broadly in line with our expectations, reflecting a softer freight rate environment, coupled with weaker demand,” Zim Chief Executive Eli Glickman said in a statement. The carrier is not hosting a conference call due to its pending merger with Hapag-Lloyd. <h3>Q2 pessimism </h3>While Glickman did not offer earnings guidance due to the merger, he said the Middle East conflict, which has sparked a surge in global oil prices, will likely drag Zim’s results down further in the second quarter. But fuel surcharges and the carrier’s exposure to liquefied natural gas should lessen the longer-term impact of higher bunker fuel prices, he said. “The conflict in the Persian Gulf has sparked a sharp increase and significant volatility in bunkering costs,” Glickman said. “We expect a more meaningful effect in the second quarter, before our actions to offset these costs begin to take hold.” Offsetting the bunker impact, Glickman said demand has improved recently, particularly with the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/spot-rate-surge-may-signal-early-peak-season-on-trans-pacific-6224734">recent strength in spot ocean rates</a>. He said seasonal contract talks over April and May show shippers are “maintaining similar contracted volumes to last year.” “We have recently observed a positive change in the trend on the trans-Pacific trade with freight rates strengthening alongside demand,” Glickman said. “If this momentum continues, we expect it to support our financial performance, particularly in the second half of the year.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Zim Integrated Shipping Services on Wednesday reported a first-quarter loss and 30% decline in revenues, citing a “softer” freight environment that pulled rates and volumes lower. The ocean carrier said the two-month surge in global bunker fuel prices due to the war in the Middle East could make an even bigger impact on its second-quarter results. Israel-based Zim recorded a diluted per-share loss of 71 cents for the quarter. That compares with an analyst consensus forecast of a $1.37 per share loss, according to Capital IQ Estimates, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Total first-quarter revenue of $1.3 billion was down 30% from a year earlier. Operational results worsened in the quarter. Zim said its average first-quarter freight rate of $1,310 per TEU was down 26%, while total volume of 866,000 TEUs was 8% lower. “Our first-quarter results were broadly in line with our expectations, reflecting a softer freight rate environment, coupled with weaker demand,” Zim Chief Executive Eli Glickman said in a statement. The carrier is not hosting a conference call due to its pending merger with Hapag-Lloyd. Q2 pessimism While Glickman did not offer earnings guidance due to the merger, he said the Middle East conflict, which has sparked a surge in global oil prices, will likely drag Zim’s results down further in the second quarter. But fuel surcharges and the carrier’s exposure to liquefied natural gas should lessen the longer-term impact of higher bunker fuel prices, he said. “The conflict in the Persian Gulf has sparked a sharp increase and significant volatility in bunkering costs,” Glickman said. “We expect a more meaningful effect in the second quarter, before our actions to offset these costs begin to take hold.” Offsetting the bunker impact, Glickman said demand has improved recently, particularly with the recent strength in spot ocean rates . He said seasonal contract talks over April and May show shippers are “maintaining similar contracted volumes to last year.” “We have recently observed a positive change in the trend on the trans-Pacific trade with freight rates strengthening alongside demand,” Glickman said. “If this momentum continues, we expect it to support our financial performance, particularly in the second half of the year.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Zim reports Q1 loss, with bunker impact expected to worsen in Q2

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 FTW25 at checkout to save 25% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Subscribe Today

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Subscribe and Save: Use code FTW25 to save 25% 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

SUBSCRIBE TODAY: Choose a subscription plan that works best for you!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

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

Upgrade 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

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE: Use code GW995 and save $500 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

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 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

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

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

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

Port News | Journal of Commerce

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

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Evolution of ocean capacity linked to varied dynamics of trade needs

‘Dummy permits’ could overcome last-mile snafus for project cargoes

CU Lines’ network expansion gives fresh capacity influx into Middle East trades