<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Maersk Line sailed to a half a billion profit in 2017, but earnings were dragged down by the cyber attack and rising unit costs.</div>

Maersk Line sailed to a half a billion profit in 2017, but earnings were dragged down by the cyber attack and rising unit costs.

<div><div><img></div>Maersk Line made a $541 million profit in 2017. Photo credit: Shutterstock.Higher rates and rising container volumes lifted Maersk Line to a $541 million profit in 2017, but the impact of a mid-year cyber attack, rising fuel prices, and industry overcapacity saw the carrier falling short of its $1 billion profit improvement target.The container shipping unit of Maersk Group reported an 11.7 percent year-on-year increase in the average freight rate, and a 3 percent rise in volume to 10.7 million TEU drove revenue up by 15 percent to $23.8 billion. However, the cyber attack cost the carrier $250 to $300...

Maersk Line made a $541 million profit in 2017. Photo credit: Shutterstock. Higher rates and rising container volumes lifted Maersk Line to a $541 million profit in 2017, but the impact of a mid-year cyber attack, rising fuel prices, and industry overcapacity saw the carrier falling short of its $1 billion profit improvement target.The container shipping unit of Maersk Group reported an 11.7 percent year-on-year increase in the average freight rate, and a 3 percent rise in volume to 10.7 million TEU drove revenue up by 15 percent to $23.8 billion. However, the cyber attack cost the carrier $250 to $300 million in the third quarter and rates fell through the second half while bunker fuel prices rose. Click to Enlarge “We were not able to deliver on the guidance of a $1 billion improvement in our 2016 profits, mainly because of the cyber attack,” Maersk Group CEO Søren Skou said. “There were strong underlying market conditions through most of the year, but the result was negatively affected by the cyber attack, weaker rates, and increasing bunker costs, especially in the fourth quarter.”Volume on Maersk Line’s east–west services grew by 2.4 percent to 3.77 million FEU, on north–south by 2.2 percent (5.21 million TEU), and by 7.3 percent on the carrier’s intra-regional operations (1.73 million TEU), reflecting strong demand with an estimated market growth of about 5 percent compared with 2016.Vincent Clerc, chief commercial officer of Maersk Line, said the volume recovery was encouraging and suggested there was no long-term affect of the cyber attack.Rising freight rates is a tide that lifts all container ships, and like its peers, Maersk Line reported freight rates increasing across all trades in 2017. East–west rates increased by 19.3 percent, driven primarily by Europe trades, while an 8.9 percent rise in north–south rates was led by West Central Asia and Africa trades. Intra-regional rates increased by 2.4 percent.The increase in freight rates was a result of record lows in 2016, and the rates peaked in the second quarter of 2017 before beginning a fall that lasted until the end of the year. While Maersk Line reported average freight rates of $2,005 per FEU across its global operations that were almost 12 percent higher than those achieved in 2016, the average unit cost of transporting each container also rose, coming in at $2,079, or 5 percent above that of 2016. Rates for 2017 were well below the average per-40-foot container achieved in 2013 and 2014 when it surged past $2,600 per FEU. The latest reading of the Shanghai Shipping Exchange’s Shanghai Containerized Freight Index shows that Asia–Europe spot market rates remained flat this week, rising by just $2 to $914 per TEU and falling slightly on Asia–Mediterranean routes to $791 per TEU. Trans-Pacific rates declined this week, with Asia–US West Coast falling by $66 to $1,486 per FEU and Asia–US East Coast sliding by $68 to $2,775 per FEU. The weekly rate movements are tracked at JOC.com’s Market Data Hub . Click to Enlarge Maersk Group as a whole reported an underlying profit of $356 million on revenue of $30.9 billion derived mainly from its transport and logistics operations. The group is divesting itself of its energy-related businesses, but if the financial performance of these discontinued operations is included, the group made a loss of $1.16 billion in 2017. The acquisition of Hamburg Süd and divestment of Mercosul Line were completed in December 2017, with the German carrier contributing $458 million in revenue in the last month of the year at an underlying loss of $8 million. Together, the two carriers have about 19 percent global capacity market share and more than 4 million TEU in container capacity. Hamburg Süd will remain an independent brand, with only operational aspects merging with Maersk Line. Cost synergies from the merger are expected to be between $350 and $400 million by 2019, primarily from integrating and optimising the networks, as well as standardized procurement. “After a successful acquisition of Hamburg Süd, the integration is off to a good start, with both carriers growing volumes during the first months. A smooth integration of Hamburg Süd remains a top priority for 2018,” Skou said.Maersk Line said in its earnings statement that, supported by strong demand growth, earnings in the container liner industry strengthened in 2017 compared with a weak 2016. However, the carrier highlighted the surplus capacity that is in the market that was challenging the fundamentals.“The current wave of mergers in the industry, which started with the merger of Hapag-Lloyd and CSAV in 2014, has increased the top five market share in the industry from 45 percent in 2014 to 64 percent, once the Cosco-OOCL deal and Japanese joint venture [Ocean Network Express] have been implemented in [first quarter] 2018,” the carrier said. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@ihs.com and follow him on Twitter: @greg_knowler.

Container lines

Maersk posts $541 million profit, but unit costs hit rates

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Less-than-truckload carriers are holding onto pricing discipline despite low demand, but more opportunities for LTL savings exist, speakers told the Inland ‘25 conference. </div>

Less-than-truckload carriers are holding onto pricing discipline despite low demand, but more opportunities for LTL savings exist, speakers told the Inland ‘25 conference.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The famed discipline that has driven US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing higher over the past decade appears to be holding. But some cracks in that pricing wall have been sighted and may be growing as low freight demand puts pressure on carrier profit margins. “The cracks in the wall are there,” Mike Regan, co-founder of TranzAct Technologies, told the Journal of Commerce’s 2025 Inland Distribution Conference in Chicago Tuesday. “We are seeing LTL carriers doing what I call defending their turf in a sea of uncertainty.” In negotiations with LTL trucking companies and shippers, Regan sees more carriers lowering rates in lanes where they need more shipments and density to protect margins. And many carriers have expanded their networks and have more space to fill. “If you have freight in lanes you want to protect, you’re going to see great pricing,” Regan said. “If you have freight in other lanes, you’re going to see different pricing.” He said he has seen one LTL carrier seeking a 5% rate hike accept a 12% rate cut to keep business. “We’re seeing carrier pricing behavior that’s irrational,” Regan said. He expects to see more such behavior as the spinoff of FedEx Freight by FedEx approaches next June. Other speakers at the conference disagreed, saying they see LTL carriers holding a line on pricing, while suggesting shippers that help carriers cut costs will benefit. “The pricing discipline is actually very solid,” said Mich Fabriga, vice president of LTL pricing at AFS Logistics, who noted the pricing floor in LTL is uneven. “One carrier can drop pricing, but that lower rate is actually an increase for another carrier.” Regional LTL carrier A. Duie Pyle is seeing low single-digit increases in contract LTL rates, said John Luciani, COO for LTL solutions. But rising costs put a premium on efficiency. “It’s a race to reduce costs,” Luciani told the conference. Increased use of dimensioning equipment to rebill shipments and new density-based classifications may also impact the cost shippers pay for LTL service, although changes to the LTL freight classification system have not had a major effect on pricing. Any cracks in LTL pricing haven’t shown up in data the US Bureau of Labor Statistics uses to create the long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI). The index, based on final, all-inclusive selling prices paid by shippers, was at a record high of 269 in August. That reading is 10.5% higher year over year and 4.3% higher than in May. Shippers facing such cost hikes — including rates and accessorial charges — need new strategies. Shippers need to “take a step back” and determine what is going to drive carrier behavior going forward, said Regan. “We have a unique opportunity to sit down with carriers, throw out the stagnant procurement model, and come up with something different,” he said. <h3>Ongoing expansion </h3>Pyle, a multiregional carrier covering the Northeast from Maine to Virginia and parts of the Midwest, has been expanding into Ohio this year and plans to keep expanding even though Pyle’s freight volume, year over year, is essentially flat, Luciani said. “We’re seeing the same number of shipments, but shipments are getting smaller,” he said during a panel discussion with Regan and other speakers. “What used to be a 1,100-pound LTL shipment two years ago is now a 950-pound shipment,” he said. It’s a trend that other speakers said will continue as shippers reduce the size of shipments and ship more frequently to meet customer replenishment and inventory needs. However, shipment numbers, not just weights, are down at many LTL carriers. FedEx Freight, the largest US LTL provider, saw its average daily shipment count <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/truckload-carriers-capturing-more-ltl-shipments-fedex-freight-6083463">drop 2.2% year over year</a> and 2.3% from the previous quarter in the quarter that ended Aug. 31. In its most recent earnings report, FedEx Freight highlighted two factors many analysts and executives say are inhibiting LTL growth — <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/manufacturing-malaise-clouds-outlook-for-us-industrial-freight-6001813">softness in US manufacturing</a> and a glut of cheap truckload capacity. Neither problem is expected to fade in the near future. Carriers aren’t retreating on plans to expand their networks, although some may postpone those plans, or portions of them, until later in 2026. Instead, the industry has been building its way back from significant contraction following the collapse of Yellow in 2023. “We’re looking at a functional restructuring of the LTL industry even as we speak,” Regan said. The eventual spinoff of FedEx Freight could accelerate that restructuring. Pyle has seen significant contraction in its home territory in the past decade. Even before Yellow’s collapse, New England Motor Freight, a large regional LTL carrier, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/nemf-bankruptcy-reveals-ltl-sinkholes-5226845">shut down in 2019</a>. When Yellow <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-trucking-market-still-in-flux-as-freight-shifts-among-carriers-5200601">shut down</a>, so did its northeastern subsidiary, New Penn. That created room for Pyle to grow, and competitive dynamics and customer needs keep Pyle looking for opportunities, Luciani said. The need to cut transit times was a primary factor behind Pyle’s decision to open terminals in Columbus and Toledo, Ohio. “We’re expanding our coverage to compete with two of our regional competitors,” as shippers look for faster ways to move freight from the Midwest to the East, he said. The company is planning to expand terminals in various parts of the Northeast, too. Customers leave carriers no choice. As the use of more sophisticated shipping technologies increases, changing how and when companies ship, carriers need to meet the new stakes, Luciani said. “We’re always looking for long-term partnerships,” he said. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The famed discipline that has driven US less-than-truckload (LTL) pricing higher over the past decade appears to be holding. But some cracks in that pricing wall have been sighted and may be growing as low freight demand puts pressure on carrier profit margins. “The cracks in the wall are there,” Mike Regan, co-founder of TranzAct Technologies, told the Journal of Commerce’s 2025 Inland Distribution Conference in Chicago Tuesday. “We are seeing LTL carriers doing what I call defending their turf in a sea of uncertainty.” In negotiations with LTL trucking companies and shippers, Regan sees more carriers lowering rates in lanes where they need more shipments and density to protect margins. And many carriers have expanded their networks and have more space to fill. “If you have freight in lanes you want to protect, you’re going to see great pricing,” Regan said. “If you have freight in other lanes, you’re going to see different pricing.” He said he has seen one LTL carrier seeking a 5% rate hike accept a 12% rate cut to keep business. “We’re seeing carrier pricing behavior that’s irrational,” Regan said. He expects to see more such behavior as the spinoff of FedEx Freight by FedEx approaches next June. Other speakers at the conference disagreed, saying they see LTL carriers holding a line on pricing, while suggesting shippers that help carriers cut costs will benefit. “The pricing discipline is actually very solid,” said Mich Fabriga, vice president of LTL pricing at AFS Logistics, who noted the pricing floor in LTL is uneven. “One carrier can drop pricing, but that lower rate is actually an increase for another carrier.” Regional LTL carrier A. Duie Pyle is seeing low single-digit increases in contract LTL rates, said John Luciani, COO for LTL solutions. But rising costs put a premium on efficiency. “It’s a race to reduce costs,” Luciani told the conference. Increased use of dimensioning equipment to rebill shipments and new density-based classifications may also impact the cost shippers pay for LTL service, although changes to the LTL freight classification system have not had a major effect on pricing. Any cracks in LTL pricing haven’t shown up in data the US Bureau of Labor Statistics uses to create the long-distance LTL producer price index (PPI). The index, based on final, all-inclusive selling prices paid by shippers, was at a record high of 269 in August. That reading is 10.5% higher year over year and 4.3% higher than in May. Shippers facing such cost hikes — including rates and accessorial charges — need new strategies. Shippers need to “take a step back” and determine what is going to drive carrier behavior going forward, said Regan. “We have a unique opportunity to sit down with carriers, throw out the stagnant procurement model, and come up with something different,” he said. Ongoing expansion Pyle, a multiregional carrier covering the Northeast from Maine to Virginia and parts of the Midwest, has been expanding into Ohio this year and plans to keep expanding even though Pyle’s freight volume, year over year, is essentially flat, Luciani said. “We’re seeing the same number of shipments, but shipments are getting smaller,” he said during a panel discussion with Regan and other speakers. “What used to be a 1,100-pound LTL shipment two years ago is now a 950-pound shipment,” he said. It’s a trend that other speakers said will continue as shippers reduce the size of shipments and ship more frequently to meet customer replenishment and inventory needs. However, shipment numbers, not just weights, are down at many LTL carriers. FedEx Freight, the largest US LTL provider, saw its average daily shipment count drop 2.2% year over year and 2.3% from the previous quarter in the quarter that ended Aug. 31. In its most recent earnings report, FedEx Freight highlighted two factors many analysts and executives say are inhibiting LTL growth — softness in US manufacturing and a glut of cheap truckload capacity. Neither problem is expected to fade in the near future. Carriers aren’t retreating on plans to expand their networks, although some may postpone those plans, or portions of them, until later in 2026. Instead, the industry has been building its way back from significant contraction following the collapse of Yellow in 2023. “We’re looking at a functional restructuring of the LTL industry even as we speak,” Regan said. The eventual spinoff of FedEx Freight could accelerate that restructuring. Pyle has seen significant contraction in its home territory in the past decade. Even before Yellow’s collapse, New England Motor Freight, a large regional LTL carrier, shut down in 2019 . When Yellow shut down , so did its northeastern subsidiary, New Penn. That created room for Pyle to grow, and competitive dynamics and customer needs keep Pyle looking for opportunities, Luciani said. The need to cut transit times was a primary factor behind Pyle’s decision to open terminals in Columbus and Toledo, Ohio. “We’re expanding our coverage to compete with two of our regional competitors,” as shippers look for faster ways to move freight from the Midwest to the East, he said. The company is planning to expand terminals in various parts of the Northeast, too. Customers leave carriers no choice. As the use of more sophisticated shipping technologies increases, changing how and when companies ship, carriers need to meet the new stakes, Luciani said. “We’re always looking for long-term partnerships,” he said. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Surface

Inland ‘25: Low demand putting pricing pressure on US LTL carriers

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">But Union Pacific’s Jim Vena says the cooperation agreements that rival railroads are making to compete with a combined UP-NS don’t yield the same benefits as a merger. </div>

But Union Pacific’s Jim Vena says the cooperation agreements that rival railroads are making to compete with a combined UP-NS don’t yield the same benefits as a merger.

<div class="phx-topic">Chicago — Shippers will still have easy access to other rail networks should Union Pacific’s (UP’s) merger with Norfolk Southern (NS) be completed, according to UP CEO Jim Vena. But Vena, speaking Tuesday at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland Distribution Conference, said such interline partnerships between railroads fail to deliver the same efficiencies as a merger, citing problems that NS is having in a track access agreement with Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). Vena said he’s confident UP can maintain <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/shippers-logistics-providers-satisfied-with-h1-rail-performance-6063203">its current high satisfaction with intermodal shippers</a> once its merger with NS is approved. While UP’s average 20-hour dwell time for railcars is among the lowest in the industry, Vena said that dwell could drop even further through a coast-to-coast network with NS. He expects overall transit times on many routes will fall by 24 to 48 hours once the merger is approved. “There’s going to be 1,000 truck moves today in Chicago that are going to move containers from our railroad to another one,” Vena told Inland ‘25. “That rubber-tire interchange is gone when you ship on the new Union Pacific. We won’t be stopping the train. We’re going to give you service right through to the end location.” In addition to avoiding interchange delays, a merged rail network will also be able to spread its volumes through more terminals and potentially avoid the congestion issues that periodically hit Chicago. Smaller hubs such as Kansas City can offer faster crew changes, while <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-joint-intermodal-service-to-link-west-coast-with-louisville-in-midwest-6080692">opening new destinations such as Louisville</a>. “If that’s the fastest route, we’re going through Chicago,” Vena said. “If the best way is to go through Kansas City and head to the northeast, then we’ll go that way.” UP already offers a coast-to-coast intermodal service through its EMP shared container service with NS and UMAX shared container service with CSX Transportation. Even while a combined UP-NS will have that same service, Vena said his railroad will still offer shippers the option of using UMAX if they choose. “We want to keep the UMAX program,” he said. “There are certain things that are going to be better with the combined UP-NS. But if the customer says I want that service with the CSX and UMAX, that’s what we’ll do.” During a separate panel, CSX Vice President Andrew Johnson said the carrier also remains committed to the UMAX program, citing a recently weekly volume record for UMAX shipments. He said the steel-wheel interchange with CSX in Chicago eliminates hundreds of truck trips. “We are committed to growing the UMAX product regardless of what happens with this merger,” Johnson said. “We will have a rail box product that we’re not walking away from.” <h3>Vena not happy with CPKC-linked NS delays in Southeast </h3>Even with a coast-to-coast network, Vena said there are regions where a combined UP-NS will still need to cooperate with other railroads to reach certain destinations, especially in the Southeast. Vena said UP will steer shippers to the fastest option, even if it involves other railroads. “If freight is headed to Florida, the fastest way and the quickest route is with CSX connecting through New Orleans,” he said. “We’ll make sure we give that option to shippers.” However, Vena said that type of cooperation is not being reciprocated by others. NS shipments to the Southeast market are facing delays on a 320-mile track segment through Mississippi and Louisiana that NS owns with CPKC known as the Meridian Speedway. Vena said CPKC, the track’s majority owner, is currently only allowing 8,000-foot trains to operate on the tracks, rather than the 11,000-foot trains allowed on the tracks under its previous owner, pre-merger Kansas City Southern. The Southeast service is primarily used by large parcel shippers FedEx and UPS to reach Atlanta. Vena said NS runs two trains instead of one to ensure those shipments will not be delayed. While the track access is NS’ problem until the merger is completed, Vena said he sent a letter to CPKC questioning why the limits are in place. And on Tuesday, Norfolk Southern filed a complaint with the Surface Transportation Board (STB), alleging that CPKC is violating commitments it made to regulators when it acquired Kansas City Southern in 2023. “We ran trains for a long time with no major headaches until you get the combination of CP and Kansas City and for some reason, they decided that they couldn’t run an 11,000-foot train even though that’s the commitment they made to the STB,” Vena said. “I’m not happy with it and hopefully they wake up and change their mind and go back to operating the trains the way they were supposed to.” Vena said the track access issue shows the difficulties that railroads have had in executing cooperation agreements. While <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bnsf-csx-unveil-new-joint-intermodal-lanes-in-aftermath-of-up-ns-merger-6067789">other railroads</a> are marketing new intermodal services through cooperation agreements, Vena said those deals will still be plagued by the different processes and operations of separate railroads. “Those cooperation agreements have never worked out,” he said. CSX’s Johnson, whose company is adding <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cn-csx-joint-service-to-connect-west-canada-and-nashville-6077903">other intermodal lanes to compete with UP-NS</a>, defended cooperation agreements as an efficient, viable way to link two railroads. “Despite what you heard earlier this morning, interline partnerships do work, they’ve worked for a long, long time, and they will continue to work with whatever happens with this merger,” he said. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Chicago — Shippers will still have easy access to other rail networks should Union Pacific’s (UP’s) merger with Norfolk Southern (NS) be completed, according to UP CEO Jim Vena. But Vena, speaking Tuesday at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland Distribution Conference, said such interline partnerships between railroads fail to deliver the same efficiencies as a merger, citing problems that NS is having in a track access agreement with Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). Vena said he’s confident UP can maintain its current high satisfaction with intermodal shippers once its merger with NS is approved. While UP’s average 20-hour dwell time for railcars is among the lowest in the industry, Vena said that dwell could drop even further through a coast-to-coast network with NS. He expects overall transit times on many routes will fall by 24 to 48 hours once the merger is approved. “There’s going to be 1,000 truck moves today in Chicago that are going to move containers from our railroad to another one,” Vena told Inland ‘25. “That rubber-tire interchange is gone when you ship on the new Union Pacific. We won’t be stopping the train. We’re going to give you service right through to the end location.” In addition to avoiding interchange delays, a merged rail network will also be able to spread its volumes through more terminals and potentially avoid the congestion issues that periodically hit Chicago. Smaller hubs such as Kansas City can offer faster crew changes, while opening new destinations such as Louisville . “If that’s the fastest route, we’re going through Chicago,” Vena said. “If the best way is to go through Kansas City and head to the northeast, then we’ll go that way.” UP already offers a coast-to-coast intermodal service through its EMP shared container service with NS and UMAX shared container service with CSX Transportation. Even while a combined UP-NS will have that same service, Vena said his railroad will still offer shippers the option of using UMAX if they choose. “We want to keep the UMAX program,” he said. “There are certain things that are going to be better with the combined UP-NS. But if the customer says I want that service with the CSX and UMAX, that’s what we’ll do.” During a separate panel, CSX Vice President Andrew Johnson said the carrier also remains committed to the UMAX program, citing a recently weekly volume record for UMAX shipments. He said the steel-wheel interchange with CSX in Chicago eliminates hundreds of truck trips. “We are committed to growing the UMAX product regardless of what happens with this merger,” Johnson said. “We will have a rail box product that we’re not walking away from.” Vena not happy with CPKC-linked NS delays in Southeast Even with a coast-to-coast network, Vena said there are regions where a combined UP-NS will still need to cooperate with other railroads to reach certain destinations, especially in the Southeast. Vena said UP will steer shippers to the fastest option, even if it involves other railroads. “If freight is headed to Florida, the fastest way and the quickest route is with CSX connecting through New Orleans,” he said. “We’ll make sure we give that option to shippers.” However, Vena said that type of cooperation is not being reciprocated by others. NS shipments to the Southeast market are facing delays on a 320-mile track segment through Mississippi and Louisiana that NS owns with CPKC known as the Meridian Speedway. Vena said CPKC, the track’s majority owner, is currently only allowing 8,000-foot trains to operate on the tracks, rather than the 11,000-foot trains allowed on the tracks under its previous owner, pre-merger Kansas City Southern. The Southeast service is primarily used by large parcel shippers FedEx and UPS to reach Atlanta. Vena said NS runs two trains instead of one to ensure those shipments will not be delayed. While the track access is NS’ problem until the merger is completed, Vena said he sent a letter to CPKC questioning why the limits are in place. And on Tuesday, Norfolk Southern filed a complaint with the Surface Transportation Board (STB), alleging that CPKC is violating commitments it made to regulators when it acquired Kansas City Southern in 2023. “We ran trains for a long time with no major headaches until you get the combination of CP and Kansas City and for some reason, they decided that they couldn’t run an 11,000-foot train even though that’s the commitment they made to the STB,” Vena said. “I’m not happy with it and hopefully they wake up and change their mind and go back to operating the trains the way they were supposed to.” Vena said the track access issue shows the difficulties that railroads have had in executing cooperation agreements. While other railroads are marketing new intermodal services through cooperation agreements, Vena said those deals will still be plagued by the different processes and operations of separate railroads. “Those cooperation agreements have never worked out,” he said. CSX’s Johnson, whose company is adding other intermodal lanes to compete with UP-NS , defended cooperation agreements as an efficient, viable way to link two railroads. “Despite what you heard earlier this morning, interline partnerships do work, they’ve worked for a long, long time, and they will continue to work with whatever happens with this merger,” he said. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Rail News

North-American rail

Intermodal providers

Inland ‘25: NS merger won’t limit access to other railroads: UP CEO

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Robust international demand was led by the growth on the Asia-Europe trade that IATA attributes to a modal shift from ocean and evolving import rules from Washington that have diverted shipments from the trans-Pacific. </div>

Robust international demand was led by the growth on the Asia-Europe trade that IATA attributes to a modal shift from ocean and evolving import rules from Washington that have diverted shipments from the trans-Pacific.

<div class="phx-topic">Air cargo demand on Asia-Europe and intra-Asia routes grew by double digits in August as widespread US tariffs and a clampdown on low-value imports continued to influence trade flows. While global air cargo demand for most trade lanes, as measured in cargo metric ton kilometers, remained robust at 7% growth year over year, Asia-Europe demand was up 13% in August, while intra-Asia rose 12.4%, according to the latest data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Asia-US demand was down 2.2% in August. Willie Walsh, IATA’s director-general, said in the association’s monthly update this week that August marked the sixth consecutive month of year-over-year growth in global demand, aided by US tariffs. “Air cargo has benefited from a shift from sea for some high-value goods as shippers try to minimize the risk of tariff changes,” Walsh said. “Growth patterns indicate some being diverted away from North America, fueling stronger growth for the Asia-Europe, within Asia, Africa-Asia and Middle East-Asia trade lanes.” He added that the “adaptability is vital as shippers navigate the evolving landscape of US tariff policy.” Growth in cross-border e-commerce traffic from China into Europe has risen sharply this year after the US on May 2 removed a Chinese exemption from “de minimis” rules that grant duty-free access for goods valued at under $800. The US subsequently <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/elimination-of-us-de-minimis-rule-hits-smes-hardest-6078319">extended the removal of the de minimis rule</a> to all its trading partners on Aug. 29. <h3>Focus shifts to Europe </h3>Dozens of freighter aircraft serving the previously booming China-US trade were suddenly surplus to requirements. China-US e-commerce filled half the air freight capacity on the trans-Pacific and about 6% of global air freight demand before the tariffs were introduced on May 2, prompting China’s online platforms to quickly shift focus to Europe. Rates have followed the same pattern as demand, increasing 10% on China-North Europe from early August to the last week in September and settling at $4.47 per kilogram, according to the Baltic Air Index. China-North America rates fell 4.5% over the same period to $5.02/kg. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="2ff119f8-b590-425a-bc08-d0f500249f00"></dynamic-object></div>Data from air cargo analyst Rotate shows capacity deployed on Asia-Europe increased 15% from June through September year over year, reaching 1.3 million metric tons. Asia-US capacity of 1.5 million metric tons was down 1% over the same period, although general air cargo demand saw China-US capacity increasing 4%. Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said in a recent market update that higher global air cargo demand was the result of a modal shift that began in July, supported by e-commerce. “It is not an indicator of increased economic activity. It’s just that air freight is getting a bigger share,” he said. “Volumes are certainly not as bad as people feared, but also not as good as people hoped.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Air cargo demand on Asia-Europe and intra-Asia routes grew by double digits in August as widespread US tariffs and a clampdown on low-value imports continued to influence trade flows. While global air cargo demand for most trade lanes, as measured in cargo metric ton kilometers, remained robust at 7% growth year over year, Asia-Europe demand was up 13% in August, while intra-Asia rose 12.4%, according to the latest data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Asia-US demand was down 2.2% in August. Willie Walsh, IATA’s director-general, said in the association’s monthly update this week that August marked the sixth consecutive month of year-over-year growth in global demand, aided by US tariffs. “Air cargo has benefited from a shift from sea for some high-value goods as shippers try to minimize the risk of tariff changes,” Walsh said. “Growth patterns indicate some being diverted away from North America, fueling stronger growth for the Asia-Europe, within Asia, Africa-Asia and Middle East-Asia trade lanes.” He added that the “adaptability is vital as shippers navigate the evolving landscape of US tariff policy.” Growth in cross-border e-commerce traffic from China into Europe has risen sharply this year after the US on May 2 removed a Chinese exemption from “de minimis” rules that grant duty-free access for goods valued at under $800. The US subsequently extended the removal of the de minimis rule to all its trading partners on Aug. 29. Focus shifts to Europe Dozens of freighter aircraft serving the previously booming China-US trade were suddenly surplus to requirements. China-US e-commerce filled half the air freight capacity on the trans-Pacific and about 6% of global air freight demand before the tariffs were introduced on May 2, prompting China’s online platforms to quickly shift focus to Europe. Rates have followed the same pattern as demand, increasing 10% on China-North Europe from early August to the last week in September and settling at $4.47 per kilogram, according to the Baltic Air Index. China-North America rates fell 4.5% over the same period to $5.02/kg. Data from air cargo analyst Rotate shows capacity deployed on Asia-Europe increased 15% from June through September year over year, reaching 1.3 million metric tons. Asia-US capacity of 1.5 million metric tons was down 1% over the same period, although general air cargo demand saw China-US capacity increasing 4%. Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight analyst at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said in a recent market update that higher global air cargo demand was the result of a modal shift that began in July, supported by e-commerce. “It is not an indicator of increased economic activity. It’s just that air freight is getting a bigger share,” he said. “Volumes are certainly not as bad as people feared, but also not as good as people hoped.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Air Cargo

E-commerce, US tariffs drive sharp rise in Asia-Europe air cargo demand

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Many drivers could be caught up in a growing US crackdown on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, with California ground zero in that campaign. </div>

Many drivers could be caught up in a growing US crackdown on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, with California ground zero in that campaign.

<div class="phx-topic">The US drayage market is weak amid plenty of capacity available to start the fourth quarter, but that could change quickly if demand rises or a <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/usdot-cracks-down-on-non-domiciled-cdls-targets-california-6087419">regulatory crackdown</a> limits capacity, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s 2025 Inland Distribution Conference heard. “If we lose 25% of the [drayage] drivers in California, you’ll have a real problem real fast,” Brian Kempisty, founder of Port X Logistics, warned during the conference in Chicago Tuesday. Many of those drivers could be caught up in a growing US crackdown on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs), with California ground zero in that campaign. The US Department of Transportation (DOT) last week ordered California to stop issuing non-domiciled CDLs and to review all such licenses. The state has 30 days to identify those CDLs that don’t meet new standards introduced to identify illegal CDL holders. In late August, the US DOT gave California, New Mexico and Washington State 30 days to begin <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-dot-presses-states-to-enforce-english-language-trucking-rules-6069884">enforcing its English-language proficiency</a> (ELP) requirements or risk losing Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) funds appropriated by Congress. California received approximately $30.7 million in MCSAP funds in 2024. The impact on drayage is difficult to predict, but strict enforcement of federal CDL licensing regulations, both the non-domiciled CDL and ELP requirements, could cut into interstate drayage capacity, Kempisty said. “If there’s strict enforcement, Southern California is going to be the hardest area hit,” he said. Tougher enforcement of existing regulations was a theme for speakers during a “View from the Top” discussion among a panel of executives at the conference. “It may be odd to say there are regulations on the books that aren’t currently being enforced, but that’s a theme right now,” said Chris Burroughs, president and CEO of the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA). Burroughs pointed to penalties for double-brokering and freight fraud and called on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to do more to enforce them. “We’re working with Congress to restore some penalties against these criminal actors,” he said. The FMCSA, he noted, often lacks funding and personnel needed for enforcement. “Even the threat of enforcement has a deterrent effect,” Mark Rourke, president and CEO of Schneider National, told the conference. But the impact of enforcement has yet to be seen. <h3>OOS orders rising </h3>According to FMCSA data, approximately 3,000 drivers had been placed out of service (OOS) as of Aug. 29 this year in more than 7,000 inspections for failing to meet ELP standards during roadside inspections. Those ELP requirements only became an OOS criteria in June. In comparison, about 5,700 ELP violations were reported in 2024, with only five OOS orders during roadside inspections, FMCSA data shows. The number of ELP out-of-service orders issued in the first eight months of this year is still dwarfed by those handed out for driving without a valid CDL (25,874) or without an FMCSA-required medical certificate (26,483). The potential impact on drayage, truckload or less-than-truckload transportation of the US DOT drive to get non-English speaking drivers and those obtaining CDLs illegally off the road remains unclear. For Kempisty, Rourke and other trucking executives, however, heightened regulatory enforcement is one more straw thrown onto the backs of small trucking firms. “We’re already starting to see capacity come out of the [drayage] market,” Kempisty said. “We’ve seen some <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/second-california-drayage-operator-shuts-business-cites-electric-truck-costs-6056822">businesses close down</a>, and the driver pool in some ports is starting to reduce.” The main reason is continued low rates, but higher insurance costs, wages and equipment costs also put a thumb on the scale. If freight demand picks up as inventories shrink in 2026, “maybe there’s not much capacity that needs to leave,” Kempisty said. “Things have been slow for two years, and they could take off fairly quickly.” US importers need to make drayage more a part of their supply chain strategy and less an afterthought, he said. “When you need capacity and your old carrier goes out of business, you don’t want to be stuck,” said Kempisty. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The US drayage market is weak amid plenty of capacity available to start the fourth quarter, but that could change quickly if demand rises or a regulatory crackdown limits capacity, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s 2025 Inland Distribution Conference heard. “If we lose 25% of the [drayage] drivers in California, you’ll have a real problem real fast,” Brian Kempisty, founder of Port X Logistics, warned during the conference in Chicago Tuesday. Many of those drivers could be caught up in a growing US crackdown on non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs), with California ground zero in that campaign. The US Department of Transportation (DOT) last week ordered California to stop issuing non-domiciled CDLs and to review all such licenses. The state has 30 days to identify those CDLs that don’t meet new standards introduced to identify illegal CDL holders. In late August, the US DOT gave California, New Mexico and Washington State 30 days to begin enforcing its English-language proficiency (ELP) requirements or risk losing Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) funds appropriated by Congress. California received approximately $30.7 million in MCSAP funds in 2024. The impact on drayage is difficult to predict, but strict enforcement of federal CDL licensing regulations, both the non-domiciled CDL and ELP requirements, could cut into interstate drayage capacity, Kempisty said. “If there’s strict enforcement, Southern California is going to be the hardest area hit,” he said. Tougher enforcement of existing regulations was a theme for speakers during a “View from the Top” discussion among a panel of executives at the conference. “It may be odd to say there are regulations on the books that aren’t currently being enforced, but that’s a theme right now,” said Chris Burroughs, president and CEO of the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA). Burroughs pointed to penalties for double-brokering and freight fraud and called on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to do more to enforce them. “We’re working with Congress to restore some penalties against these criminal actors,” he said. The FMCSA, he noted, often lacks funding and personnel needed for enforcement. “Even the threat of enforcement has a deterrent effect,” Mark Rourke, president and CEO of Schneider National, told the conference. But the impact of enforcement has yet to be seen. OOS orders rising According to FMCSA data, approximately 3,000 drivers had been placed out of service (OOS) as of Aug. 29 this year in more than 7,000 inspections for failing to meet ELP standards during roadside inspections. Those ELP requirements only became an OOS criteria in June. In comparison, about 5,700 ELP violations were reported in 2024, with only five OOS orders during roadside inspections, FMCSA data shows. The number of ELP out-of-service orders issued in the first eight months of this year is still dwarfed by those handed out for driving without a valid CDL (25,874) or without an FMCSA-required medical certificate (26,483). The potential impact on drayage, truckload or less-than-truckload transportation of the US DOT drive to get non-English speaking drivers and those obtaining CDLs illegally off the road remains unclear. For Kempisty, Rourke and other trucking executives, however, heightened regulatory enforcement is one more straw thrown onto the backs of small trucking firms. “We’re already starting to see capacity come out of the [drayage] market,” Kempisty said. “We’ve seen some businesses close down , and the driver pool in some ports is starting to reduce.” The main reason is continued low rates, but higher insurance costs, wages and equipment costs also put a thumb on the scale. If freight demand picks up as inventories shrink in 2026, “maybe there’s not much capacity that needs to leave,” Kempisty said. “Things have been slow for two years, and they could take off fairly quickly.” US importers need to make drayage more a part of their supply chain strategy and less an afterthought, he said. “When you need capacity and your old carrier goes out of business, you don’t want to be stuck,” said Kempisty. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Port News

Drayage

Inland ‘25: Drayage capacity could tighten quickly under tougher regulations

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The US economy looks to weaken further in the fourth quarter due to tariffs and unemployment, but inventories are historically low and may spur 2026 freight demand, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland ‘25 Distribution Conference heard. </div>

The US economy looks to weaken further in the fourth quarter due to tariffs and unemployment, but inventories are historically low and may spur 2026 freight demand, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland ‘25 Distribution Conference heard.

<div class="phx-topic">Chicago — US growth is likely to weaken through the end of 2025 as tariff-driven inflation and the resulting business uncertainty affect consumer spending and hiring and put further pressure on the freight economy, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland ‘25 Distribution Conference were told Tuesday. However, inventory data and the potential for President Donald Trump’s tax bill to spur business investment point trucking to a better start to 2026. After three quarters of uneven growth, US gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to come in slightly negative, S&amp;P Global economist Paul Bingham told Inland ‘25. S&amp;P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. The coming quarter will see another burst of inflation as businesses face more tariff costs after drawing down inventories of goods frontloaded earlier in the year, Bingham said. That will put a further pause on new capital investments as companies reckon with higher costs. “It takes time [for tariffs] on those imported goods to get to the retail shelves from distribution centers, so we’re forecasting actually [that] inflation is increasing right now despite what the Federal Reserve believes,” Bingham said. Bingham said it’s likely unemployment will also tick higher, creating more uncertainty for growth in consumer spending. October will likely see an increase in unemployment data, he said, as government layoffs from earlier in the year start to show up in data. “This is still a relatively weak freight demand world from a consumption perspective,” Bingham said. While 2025 GDP growth is expected to come at 1.9%, Bingham said the early outlook for 2026 is for 2.6% growth, on par with 2024. If trade deals are sealed and import duties are settled, tariffs will be a one-time price hike that will not result in persistent inflation. Record US tariff rates that average 23% could also moderate as the Trump administration makes new trade deals. “If we have stability, business can plan and you can accommodate with those increased costs,” Bingham said. <h3>More inventory restocking next year? </h3>A more stable 2026 is likely to prompt more inventory restocking, Keith Prather, managing director at economics consultancy Armada Corporate Intelligence, told the conference. Prather’s research showed that some 85% of businesses dependent on freight have an inventory-to-sales ratio at or below their 2019 level, implying pent-up demand to restock. “Inventories are leaner than what they have been historically over the last six to seven years,” Prather said. Whether 2026 will be the beginning of the end of a three-year freight recession remains unclear, though, as trucking supply still has room to shrink, Mark Rourke, CEO of intermodal carrier Schneider National, said. Rourke said Schneider has been able to get low- to mid-single-digit-rate increases from its customers, but those customers have also switched some of their freight to other carriers. “We are willing at this juncture, particularly this part of the cycle, to give up volume for price and that’s our strategy,” he told the conference. Rourke said there are some early indications that truck supply could further tighten in the coming months as orders for new heavy-duty trucks remain weak. The shuttering of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/second-california-drayage-operator-shuts-business-cites-electric-truck-costs-6056822">two drayage providers on the West Coast in recent months</a> indicates lenders to the trucking industry are becoming stricter, he noted. Likewise, the Trump administration’s recent enforcement action around <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-dot-presses-states-to-enforce-english-language-trucking-rules-6069884">English-language proficiency</a> and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/usdot-cracks-down-on-non-domiciled-cdls-targets-california-6087419">the potential crackdowns against non-US drivers</a> could impact the “shadow capacity” in the market. “I think all of those things can serve as a catalyst [for tighter capacity],” Rourke said. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Chicago — US growth is likely to weaken through the end of 2025 as tariff-driven inflation and the resulting business uncertainty affect consumer spending and hiring and put further pressure on the freight economy, attendees at the Journal of Commerce’s Inland ‘25 Distribution Conference were told Tuesday. However, inventory data and the potential for President Donald Trump’s tax bill to spur business investment point trucking to a better start to 2026. After three quarters of uneven growth, US gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to come in slightly negative, S&P Global economist Paul Bingham told Inland ‘25. S&P Global is the parent company of the Journal of Commerce. The coming quarter will see another burst of inflation as businesses face more tariff costs after drawing down inventories of goods frontloaded earlier in the year, Bingham said. That will put a further pause on new capital investments as companies reckon with higher costs. “It takes time [for tariffs] on those imported goods to get to the retail shelves from distribution centers, so we’re forecasting actually [that] inflation is increasing right now despite what the Federal Reserve believes,” Bingham said. Bingham said it’s likely unemployment will also tick higher, creating more uncertainty for growth in consumer spending. October will likely see an increase in unemployment data, he said, as government layoffs from earlier in the year start to show up in data. “This is still a relatively weak freight demand world from a consumption perspective,” Bingham said. While 2025 GDP growth is expected to come at 1.9%, Bingham said the early outlook for 2026 is for 2.6% growth, on par with 2024. If trade deals are sealed and import duties are settled, tariffs will be a one-time price hike that will not result in persistent inflation. Record US tariff rates that average 23% could also moderate as the Trump administration makes new trade deals. “If we have stability, business can plan and you can accommodate with those increased costs,” Bingham said. More inventory restocking next year? A more stable 2026 is likely to prompt more inventory restocking, Keith Prather, managing director at economics consultancy Armada Corporate Intelligence, told the conference. Prather’s research showed that some 85% of businesses dependent on freight have an inventory-to-sales ratio at or below their 2019 level, implying pent-up demand to restock. “Inventories are leaner than what they have been historically over the last six to seven years,” Prather said. Whether 2026 will be the beginning of the end of a three-year freight recession remains unclear, though, as trucking supply still has room to shrink, Mark Rourke, CEO of intermodal carrier Schneider National, said. Rourke said Schneider has been able to get low- to mid-single-digit-rate increases from its customers, but those customers have also switched some of their freight to other carriers. “We are willing at this juncture, particularly this part of the cycle, to give up volume for price and that’s our strategy,” he told the conference. Rourke said there are some early indications that truck supply could further tighten in the coming months as orders for new heavy-duty trucks remain weak. The shuttering of two drayage providers on the West Coast in recent months indicates lenders to the trucking industry are becoming stricter, he noted. Likewise, the Trump administration’s recent enforcement action around English-language proficiency and the potential crackdowns against non-US drivers could impact the “shadow capacity” in the market. “I think all of those things can serve as a catalyst [for tighter capacity],” Rourke said. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Inland ‘25: Weak end to 2025 could set up US freight economy for better 2026

Use code GTW595 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 STSW20 at checkout to save 20% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

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

SUBSCRIBE TODAY AND SAVE!

Upgrade to Gold using code TPMGW595 to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code TPM26GW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

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

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

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

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE: Use code STSW20 to save 20% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


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

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD: Upgrade to Gold using code TPMGW595 to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE MORE WITH GOLD: Use code TPM26GW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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 premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

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

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

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

Container Shipping News

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

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

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News

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

Inland ‘25: Low demand putting pricing pressure on US LTL carriers

Inland ‘25: NS merger won’t limit access to other railroads: UP CEO

E-commerce, US tariffs drive sharp rise in Asia-Europe air cargo demand