<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Port of Philadelphia is gearing up for a legal and political fight against a decision by a Europ</div>

The Port of Philadelphia is gearing up for a legal and political fight against a decision by a Europ

<div>The Port of Philadelphia is gearing up for a legal and political fight against a decision by a European ocean conference to eliminate Philadelphia as a base port, a move that could cost local businesses thousands of dollars in extra shipping costs."We're not going to sit by and be disadvantaged by this act," said William B. McLaughlin, director of communications for the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority.The PRPA plans to file a protest with the Federal Maritime Commission and bring the conference's action to the attention of the congressional delegations from New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware."The decision is unnecessary and unacceptable,"...

The Port of Philadelphia is gearing up for a legal and political fight against a decision by a European ocean conference to eliminate Philadelphia as a base port, a move that could cost local businesses thousands of dollars in extra shipping costs. "We're not going to sit by and be disadvantaged by this act," said William B. McLaughlin, director of communications for the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority.The PRPA plans to file a protest with the Federal Maritime Commission and bring the conference's action to the attention of the congressional delegations from New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware. "The decision is unnecessary and unacceptable," said Mr. McLaughlin. On Jan. 1, 1992, the seven members of the North Europe-U.S.A. Rate Agreement will stop paying the overland costs of Philadelphia containers carried by conference vessels, a practice known as alternate port tariff service. The decision, announced Aug. 12, comes three months after Hapag-Lloyd AG dropped Philadelphia as a port of call. That event was triggered by the renegotiation of the line's long-standing vessel sharing agreement with Atlantic Container Lines AG. "Because Hapag-Lloyd no longer offers direct service to Philadelphia, the entire membership (of the conference) was obliged not to offer base port status," said Harold G. Holden, executive director of the conference. Hapag- Lloyd was the last conference member to call at Philadelphia. In effect, conference carriers will no longer issue a Philadelphia bill of lading. Under current tariffs, shippers and forwarders deliver a shipment to a container freight station in Philadelphia for pickup by conference carriers. The carriers truck the container to Baltimore or New York and treat the cargo as if their ship had called at the port of Philadelphia. "That's what they're going to eliminate," said Evelyn D. Aharon, export manager for Kurz-Allen Inc., a Philadelphia freight forwarder. As a result, shippers will have to pay higher rates to deliver European- bound cargo to ports where conference carriers call. Ms. Aharon said these rates were difficult to gauge but estimated that moving cargo to Baltimore or New York by truck would add $100 to $150 to the cost of each container. "Its definitely regressive from our standpoint," she said. Other companies describe change in stronger language. "The economics is that it's killing off the port of Philadelphia," said Joseph Centanni, export department manager for Davies, Turner & Co., another freight forwarder. Mr. McLaughlin said the PRPA was reviewing "legal remedies" with port authority maritime attorneys. PRPA is "in-between lawyers and we haven't engaged another," said Mr. McLaughlin. The conference's Mr. Holden said, "We'll see what they have to say," adding that the decision to eliminate Philadelphia's alternate port service was based on the changing economics of the shipping industry. "Its the nature of the competitive factor," he said. "Ships are getting bigger and ports are being centralized. This could happen to any port." A provision in the conference's tariffs defines a base port as a port where the mother vessel of a line calls. This "is clearly recognized as valid by the FMC," said Mr. Holden. "I'd be surprised if (the challenge) caused us any problems." In addition to Hapag-Lloyd and ACL, the members of the North Europe-U.S.A. Rate Agreement are P&O Containers Ltd.; Sea-Land Service Inc.; Compagnie Generale Maritime; Nedlloyd Lijnen BV; and A.P. Moller-Maersk Line.

Maritime

PHILADELPHIA PLANS TO CHALLENGE SNUB BY EUROPEAN CONFERENCE

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The departure of the Montreal Port Authority CEO comes just as development work begins on a new US$1.15 billion container terminal.</div>

The departure of the Montreal Port Authority CEO comes just as development work begins on a new US$1.15 billion container terminal.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The two-year tenure of Montreal Port Authority (MPA) chief Julie Gascon ended abruptly Friday, just as development work is beginning on a C$1.6 billion (US$1.15 billion) container terminal to be operated by DP World. A statement from the port authority gave no reason for the departure of Gascon, who became president and CEO of the agency in February 2024. A committee of the port authority’s board of directors will work to ensure interim leadership is in place as Gascon’s successor is sought, according to the statement. “With the Contrecoeur terminal expansion project actively progressing, the Port of Montreal is entering a new phase in its development, which will take place as part of a new strategic cycle for the MPA,” said Nathalie Pilon, chair of the MPA’s board of directors. “The organization is in an excellent position to fulfill its mandate and contribute to Canada’s competitiveness in global markets.” Gascon oversaw DP World <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/dp-world-aims-to-run-carney-backed-montreal-terminal-6072977">being awarded the winning bid</a> to operate the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with a planned annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase the total capacity of Canada’s second-largest container port by 150%. Gascon was viewed locally as bringing more maritime expertise and a greater commercial understanding to the role as MPA chief when she succeeded utility veteran Martin Imbleau, who also abruptly exited in July 2023. Contact the JOC news team at <a href="mailto:News@joc.com">news@joc.com.</a></div>

The two-year tenure of Montreal Port Authority (MPA) chief Julie Gascon ended abruptly Friday, just as development work is beginning on a C$1.6 billion (US$1.15 billion) container terminal to be operated by DP World. A statement from the port authority gave no reason for the departure of Gascon, who became president and CEO of the agency in February 2024. A committee of the port authority’s board of directors will work to ensure interim leadership is in place as Gascon’s successor is sought, according to the statement. “With the Contrecoeur terminal expansion project actively progressing, the Port of Montreal is entering a new phase in its development, which will take place as part of a new strategic cycle for the MPA,” said Nathalie Pilon, chair of the MPA’s board of directors. “The organization is in an excellent position to fulfill its mandate and contribute to Canada’s competitiveness in global markets.” Gascon oversaw DP World being awarded the winning bid to operate the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with a planned annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase the total capacity of Canada’s second-largest container port by 150%. Gascon was viewed locally as bringing more maritime expertise and a greater commercial understanding to the role as MPA chief when she succeeded utility veteran Martin Imbleau, who also abruptly exited in July 2023. Contact the JOC news team at news@joc.com.

Port News

North American ports

Marine terminals

Container Shipping News

Montreal Port chief Gascon exits abruptly after two-year tenure

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The port’s chief executive said his agency will do more to attract large retail BCOs to reverse lost market share, while also investing in non-container projects. </div>

The port’s chief executive said his agency will do more to attract large retail BCOs to reverse lost market share, while also investing in non-container projects.

<div class="phx-topic">The Port of Charleston will aggressively court retail goods shippers — and possibly invest alongside them — as part of a long-term strategy to regrow the port’s volumes. The port is also looking at how to restructure the operating model of its Leatherman marine terminal following the longshore union’s 2024 victory over work jurisdiction at the facility. South Carolina Ports Authority Chief Executive Micah Mallace told a state senate committee this Wednesday that Charleston’s container volumes for the first eight months of the 2026 fiscal year through February are running about 6% below SC Ports’ original forecast. Along with the overall trade challenges hitting every port, Charleston is heavily levered to the state’s advanced manufacturers, with BMW being the port’s largest customer, Mallace said. The German automaker lowered its 2026 profit outlook in March due to a combination of tariffs, material costs and competition from Chinese automakers. Mallace, who also helped the port attract a Walmart distribution center to Charleston six years ago, said the port needs more such retail shippers to reverse its market share losses. He said the demographics for South Carolina and the Southeast favor a long-term consumer base and that more large retail shippers will further reinforce the manufacturing cargo base through overall job growth. “We need a large local cargo base,” Mallace said. “We have to do a better job of having a compelling offering for distribution center locations and major retailers. The retailers determine where the ships call, and the manufacturers follow.” “Shipping lines pick ports because they have to go there,” he added. “If we can grow our local freight base, the shipping lines will come irrespective of how well we service them and how much it costs.”<h3>Port will ‘carry the water’ on new projects </h3>While offering few direct details about SC Port’s new strategy, Mallace said the agency in the short term will be beefing up its commercial and sales team and increasing outreach to potential shippers. Mallace also told state senators that SC Ports will be redirecting capital spending to “immediate revenue generating opportunities” for the port. At a mid-March board meeting, SC Ports’ CFO Phillip Padgett said overall revenue of $267 million for the eight-month fiscal 2026 period was 4% below forecast. Decreases in container activity, terminal demurrage and chassis rentals were cited for the decline. Mallace did not elaborate on the types of investments the port would make, but he said the agency has a lot of land that could be leased or otherwise monetized. He also suggested SC Ports could take on the role of economic development agency by helping fund or underwrite retail distribution or similar projects to increase the cargo base.“If we have to carry the water on those projects, we will,” Mallace said. “We have to in order to be a going concern in the port industry.“You will see us do deals that don’t look like what we used to do in the past, which were only container-related,” he said. “There are some exciting prospects out there.”The redirection of capital spending comes as Charleston has largely completed most of its short-term port expansion and now just needs to “fill it up” Mallace said. <h3>Leatherman costs need addressing</h3>Work on the Navy Base Intermodal Facility, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/charlestons-navy-base-rail-yard-project-faces-delays-big-cost-overruns-6070926">which has faced cost overruns and a delayed opening</a>, is largely done, Mallace said. However, the port’s near-dock rail facility still needs about 80,000 feet of rail track installed across North Charleston for it to access the Norfolk Southern Railway and CSX Transportation networks. He said the port is close to reaching operating agreements with both railroads while <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/charleston-slows-railyard-development-amid-insufficient-shipper-demand-6164158">it waits for enough shipper demand to fill the railcars</a>.“The last remaining infrastructure on which we are focused is to get both railroads into the terminal,” Mallace said. “It’s what still needs to be delivered, and it’s very complicated.”SC Ports is also looking at how to restructure its operations at the Hugh K. Leatherman Terminal, which was effectively closed for three years due to a dispute with the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) over work jurisdiction for crane jobs that began in 2021. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/sc-ports-strikes-deal-with-ila-to-fully-open-leatherman-marine-terminal-5192280">SC Ports reached an agreement</a> in 2024 that put Leatherman’s crane operators, who were formerly state employees, under ILA jurisdiction at its contracted wages. As part of that change, SC Ports began levying a $17.95 per container fee to “offset the change in the labor model cost structure.”The change in business model has made Leatherman less cost competitive than SC Ports’ Wando Welch terminal, which retains state crane operators. Mallace said the current freight environment is prizing cost above all, and higher-cost facilities are not competitive. He added that the port is negotiating with the local ILA on how to make Leatherman more efficient. “The Hugh Leatherman terminal has a cost structure that’s different than others in the South Atlantic,” Mallace said. “We are working with our partners to address that right now.” He added that the port, which has been offering employees early retirement packages, is also dealing with higher fuel and other costs that need to be addressed. “Our costs are a little out of line with where they need to be for us to offer the most competitive rates that we can offer,” Mallace told state senators. “Our customers choose us based on cost, first and foremost. Service and other things are also considered. But cost is first and foremost.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a> </div>

The Port of Charleston will aggressively court retail goods shippers — and possibly invest alongside them — as part of a long-term strategy to regrow the port’s volumes. The port is also looking at how to restructure the operating model of its Leatherman marine terminal following the longshore union’s 2024 victory over work jurisdiction at the facility. South Carolina Ports Authority Chief Executive Micah Mallace told a state senate committee this Wednesday that Charleston’s container volumes for the first eight months of the 2026 fiscal year through February are running about 6% below SC Ports’ original forecast. Along with the overall trade challenges hitting every port, Charleston is heavily levered to the state’s advanced manufacturers, with BMW being the port’s largest customer, Mallace said. The German automaker lowered its 2026 profit outlook in March due to a combination of tariffs, material costs and competition from Chinese automakers. Mallace, who also helped the port attract a Walmart distribution center to Charleston six years ago, said the port needs more such retail shippers to reverse its market share losses. He said the demographics for South Carolina and the Southeast favor a long-term consumer base and that more large retail shippers will further reinforce the manufacturing cargo base through overall job growth. “We need a large local cargo base,” Mallace said. “We have to do a better job of having a compelling offering for distribution center locations and major retailers. The retailers determine where the ships call, and the manufacturers follow.” “Shipping lines pick ports because they have to go there,” he added. “If we can grow our local freight base, the shipping lines will come irrespective of how well we service them and how much it costs.” Port will ‘carry the water’ on new projects While offering few direct details about SC Port’s new strategy, Mallace said the agency in the short term will be beefing up its commercial and sales team and increasing outreach to potential shippers. Mallace also told state senators that SC Ports will be redirecting capital spending to “immediate revenue generating opportunities” for the port. At a mid-March board meeting, SC Ports’ CFO Phillip Padgett said overall revenue of $267 million for the eight-month fiscal 2026 period was 4% below forecast. Decreases in container activity, terminal demurrage and chassis rentals were cited for the decline. Mallace did not elaborate on the types of investments the port would make, but he said the agency has a lot of land that could be leased or otherwise monetized. He also suggested SC Ports could take on the role of economic development agency by helping fund or underwrite retail distribution or similar projects to increase the cargo base. “If we have to carry the water on those projects, we will,” Mallace said. “We have to in order to be a going concern in the port industry. “You will see us do deals that don’t look like what we used to do in the past, which were only container-related,” he said. “There are some exciting prospects out there.” The redirection of capital spending comes as Charleston has largely completed most of its short-term port expansion and now just needs to “fill it up” Mallace said. Leatherman costs need addressing Work on the Navy Base Intermodal Facility, which has faced cost overruns and a delayed opening , is largely done, Mallace said. However, the port’s near-dock rail facility still needs about 80,000 feet of rail track installed across North Charleston for it to access the Norfolk Southern Railway and CSX Transportation networks. He said the port is close to reaching operating agreements with both railroads while it waits for enough shipper demand to fill the railcars . “The last remaining infrastructure on which we are focused is to get both railroads into the terminal,” Mallace said. “It’s what still needs to be delivered, and it’s very complicated.” SC Ports is also looking at how to restructure its operations at the Hugh K. Leatherman Terminal, which was effectively closed for three years due to a dispute with the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) over work jurisdiction for crane jobs that began in 2021. SC Ports reached an agreement in 2024 that put Leatherman’s crane operators, who were formerly state employees, under ILA jurisdiction at its contracted wages. As part of that change, SC Ports began levying a $17.95 per container fee to “offset the change in the labor model cost structure.” The change in business model has made Leatherman less cost competitive than SC Ports’ Wando Welch terminal, which retains state crane operators. Mallace said the current freight environment is prizing cost above all, and higher-cost facilities are not competitive. He added that the port is negotiating with the local ILA on how to make Leatherman more efficient. “The Hugh Leatherman terminal has a cost structure that’s different than others in the South Atlantic,” Mallace said. “We are working with our partners to address that right now.” He added that the port, which has been offering employees early retirement packages, is also dealing with higher fuel and other costs that need to be addressed. “Our costs are a little out of line with where they need to be for us to offer the most competitive rates that we can offer,” Mallace told state senators. “Our customers choose us based on cost, first and foremost. Service and other things are also considered. But cost is first and foremost.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com

Charleston looking for retailer shippers to revive port’s growth

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The unanimous decision prevents the carrier from immediately implementing the fee, which is meant to help recoup fuel costs on US trades that have been driven higher due to the war with Iran.</div>

The unanimous decision prevents the carrier from immediately implementing the fee, which is meant to help recoup fuel costs on US trades that have been driven higher due to the war with Iran.

<div class="phx-topic">The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has rejected a second request from Maersk to waive a 30-day notice period for the implementation of an emergency fuel surcharge, a spokesperson for the agency said Friday. The unanimous rejection prevents the carrier from immediately implementing the fee, which is meant to help recoup fuel costs on US trades that have been driven higher due to the war with Iran. Still, Maersk will only have to wait until April 8 to formally implement the fee, given that its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersk-again-asks-fmc-to-waive-30-day-review-period-for-emergency-fuel-surcharge-6197792">waiver request to the FMC was made on March 11.</a>An April 3 letter from the FMC to Maersk said the carrier “failed to provide good cause” for the agency to waive the 30-day waiting period, and referred to a prior statement from FMC Chairman Laura DiBella that carriers should provide data behind the decision to levy the emergency surcharges and specify a duration, so, as DiBella said, the fee is “reasonably related to the increased costs.” In its petition, Maersk stressed that the surcharges were tied only to higher fuel prices, pointing to how low-sulfur bunker fuel prices jumped 82% on average, to $929 per metric ton, between Feb. 6 and March 9; the war began Feb. 28. The carrier justified the emergency fuel surcharge, saying it couldn’t fully absorb the higher prices that “are likely to remain elevated and volatile given the uncertainty of the duration of hostilities and their impact on the price of oil and bunker fuel.” The surcharge Maersk will implement next week amounts to $200 per TEU for US head-haul trades and $100 per TEU for the backhaul. This week’s rejection of Maersk’s waiver request was the second time in 11 days the carrier was turned down. The FMC <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmc-rejects-requests-by-carriers-to-waive-waiting-period-for-middle-east-surcharges-6191881">on March 23 rejected requests</a> from Maersk, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, and Zim Integrated Shipping Services to waive the 30-day waiting period for an initial round of emergency fuel surcharges. <h3>Costs rise as concerns grow over fuel availability </h3>Shipper groups, including the Agriculture Transportation Coalition, are skeptical of ocean carriers imposing higher fuel surcharges given that it is not clear how the surcharge amounts were calculated and that freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates include fuel costs. For contract rates, the so-called bunker adjustment factor (BAF) adjusts to higher fuel prices, but it can take up to two months to calibrate to the new levels, hampering ocean carriers’ cash flow in the short-term. The cost of war-related disruption has been substantial. Hapag-Lloyd, for example, is facing $40 million to $50 million per week in higher operating expenses due to war, now in its fifth week, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/war-adding-40-50-million-per-week-to-hapag-lloyds-costs-ceo-6193532">CEO Rolf Habben Jansen told reporters on March 26.</a> But the higher price of bunker fuel is not the only problem. Fuel availability, particularly in Asia, is becoming a growing concern for ocean carriers, with analysts warning that the world’s largest bunkering hub of Singapore <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/singapore-bunker-supply-continues-to-run-down-as-middle-east-war-drags-on-6198359">has less than a month’s supply remaining and no replenishment in sight</a>. If bunker fuel scarcity worsens, container lines could be forced to sail slower, take alternative routes, or blank sailings. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mailto:mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com.</a></div>

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has rejected a second request from Maersk to waive a 30-day notice period for the implementation of an emergency fuel surcharge, a spokesperson for the agency said Friday. The unanimous rejection prevents the carrier from immediately implementing the fee, which is meant to help recoup fuel costs on US trades that have been driven higher due to the war with Iran. Still, Maersk will only have to wait until April 8 to formally implement the fee, given that its waiver request to the FMC was made on March 11. An April 3 letter from the FMC to Maersk said the carrier “failed to provide good cause” for the agency to waive the 30-day waiting period, and referred to a prior statement from FMC Chairman Laura DiBella that carriers should provide data behind the decision to levy the emergency surcharges and specify a duration, so, as DiBella said, the fee is “reasonably related to the increased costs.” In its petition, Maersk stressed that the surcharges were tied only to higher fuel prices, pointing to how low-sulfur bunker fuel prices jumped 82% on average, to $929 per metric ton, between Feb. 6 and March 9; the war began Feb. 28. The carrier justified the emergency fuel surcharge, saying it couldn’t fully absorb the higher prices that “are likely to remain elevated and volatile given the uncertainty of the duration of hostilities and their impact on the price of oil and bunker fuel.” The surcharge Maersk will implement next week amounts to $200 per TEU for US head-haul trades and $100 per TEU for the backhaul. This week’s rejection of Maersk’s waiver request was the second time in 11 days the carrier was turned down. The FMC on March 23 rejected requests from Maersk, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, and Zim Integrated Shipping Services to waive the 30-day waiting period for an initial round of emergency fuel surcharges. Costs rise as concerns grow over fuel availability Shipper groups, including the Agriculture Transportation Coalition, are skeptical of ocean carriers imposing higher fuel surcharges given that it is not clear how the surcharge amounts were calculated and that freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates include fuel costs. For contract rates, the so-called bunker adjustment factor (BAF) adjusts to higher fuel prices, but it can take up to two months to calibrate to the new levels, hampering ocean carriers’ cash flow in the short-term. The cost of war-related disruption has been substantial. Hapag-Lloyd, for example, is facing $40 million to $50 million per week in higher operating expenses due to war, now in its fifth week, CEO Rolf Habben Jansen told reporters on March 26. But the higher price of bunker fuel is not the only problem. Fuel availability, particularly in Asia, is becoming a growing concern for ocean carriers, with analysts warning that the world’s largest bunkering hub of Singapore has less than a month’s supply remaining and no replenishment in sight . If bunker fuel scarcity worsens, container lines could be forced to sail slower, take alternative routes, or blank sailings. Contact Mark Szakonyi at  mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com.

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Container lines

Trans-Atlantic

Trans-Pacific

FMC again rejects Maersk petition to waive notice period for emergency fuel surcharge

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The CMA CGM Kribi successfully transited the strait late Thursday, the first passage for a Western-operated container ship since the war between the US/Israel and Iran disrupted access to the crucial waterway five weeks ago.</div>

The CMA CGM Kribi successfully transited the strait late Thursday, the first passage for a Western-operated container ship since the war between the US/Israel and Iran disrupted access to the crucial waterway five weeks ago.

<div class="phx-topic">French ocean carrier CMA CGM is understood to have secured assurances from Iranian authorities guaranteeing safe passage for its 14 container ships trapped inside the Strait of Hormuz since the war began, industry sources with knowledge of the matter told the Journal of Commerce Friday. Signaling that breakthrough, the Malta-flagged CMA CGM Kribi successfully transited the strait late Thursday local time, the first passage for a Western-operated container ship since the war between the US/Israel and Iran disrupted access to the crucial waterway five weeks ago. The 5,500-TEU Kribi is part of the Marseille-based carrier’s Middle East-India-West Africa network known as Midas1 and operated in conjunction with Maersk, available data shows. The industry sources also indicated that there are another six CMA CGM container vessels held up in the Persian Gulf and awaiting clearance to transit Hormuz. The sources believe the measured approach adopted by French President Emmanuel Macron during the Persian Gulf conflict has helped CMA CGM strike a deal with Iran, which recently reiterated that Hormuz would only remain open to maritime traffic from nonhostile countries. Specifics of any possible deal between the carrier and Iran were not known. There have been unconfirmed reports that Tehran is asking carriers to pay a “toll fee” of $1 million or $2 million per ship to guarantee safe passage through the strait. During a briefing with reporters last week, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/war-adding-40-50-million-per-week-to-hapag-lloyds-costs-ceo-6193532">Hapag-Lloyd CEO Rolf Habben Jansen was asked</a> whether the carrier would pay Tehran to secure safe passage for its six ships that remain trapped in the war zone. “We are pursuing every avenue that we can to try to get the ships and the crews safely out, and I would not rule out anything at this point,” Habben Jansen said. Earlier this week, three Chinese-linked vessels, including two container ships operated by Cosco Shipping, transited through Hormuz. The industry sources also told the Journal of Commerce that 15 ships operated by Mediterranean Shipping Co. are stuck in the conflict zone, as well as six from Maersk. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com.</a></div>

French ocean carrier CMA CGM is understood to have secured assurances from Iranian authorities guaranteeing safe passage for its 14 container ships trapped inside the Strait of Hormuz since the war began, industry sources with knowledge of the matter told the Journal of Commerce Friday. Signaling that breakthrough, the Malta-flagged CMA CGM Kribi successfully transited the strait late Thursday local time, the first passage for a Western-operated container ship since the war between the US/Israel and Iran disrupted access to the crucial waterway five weeks ago. The 5,500-TEU Kribi is part of the Marseille-based carrier’s Middle East-India-West Africa network known as Midas1 and operated in conjunction with Maersk, available data shows. The industry sources also indicated that there are another six CMA CGM container vessels held up in the Persian Gulf and awaiting clearance to transit Hormuz. The sources believe the measured approach adopted by French President Emmanuel Macron during the Persian Gulf conflict has helped CMA CGM strike a deal with Iran, which recently reiterated that Hormuz would only remain open to maritime traffic from nonhostile countries. Specifics of any possible deal between the carrier and Iran were not known. There have been unconfirmed reports that Tehran is asking carriers to pay a “toll fee” of $1 million or $2 million per ship to guarantee safe passage through the strait. During a briefing with reporters last week, Hapag-Lloyd CEO Rolf Habben Jansen was asked whether the carrier would pay Tehran to secure safe passage for its six ships that remain trapped in the war zone. “We are pursuing every avenue that we can to try to get the ships and the crews safely out, and I would not rule out anything at this point,” Habben Jansen said. Earlier this week, three Chinese-linked vessels, including two container ships operated by Cosco Shipping, transited through Hormuz. The industry sources also told the Journal of Commerce that 15 ships operated by Mediterranean Shipping Co. are stuck in the conflict zone, as well as six from Maersk. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com.

CMA CGM said to have deal with Iran to allow safe passage through Hormuz: sources

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Global jet fuel prices have almost doubled since the Middle East war began on Feb. 28, piling additional expenses onto an operating component that before the conflict was already more than 30% of total costs.</div>

Global jet fuel prices have almost doubled since the Middle East war began on Feb. 28, piling additional expenses onto an operating component that before the conflict was already more than 30% of total costs.

<div class="phx-topic">Rising energy prices are placing growing pressure on air freighter operators, with the soaring cost of jet fuel eroding margins and pushing part of the global fleet closer toward economic unviability. Global jet fuel prices have almost doubled since the Middle East war began on Feb. 28, piling additional expenses onto an operating component that before the conflict was already more than 30% of total costs. “For less efficient aircraft like the B747-400F, the math is getting tight,” Rotate analyst Archisman Acharya noted in a report. “Global average profitability is approaching breakeven, and on lanes without strong yield growth, margins have already turned negative.” The B747-400 freighter accounts for a significant share of global freighter capacity, with the trans-Pacific the most exposed trade lane at 22%. During the last comparable fuel spike in 2022, Acharya said global B747-400F capacity declined 12%. While the price of jet fuel has risen sharply, concerns are now growing over its availability, particularly in Asia. China and Thailand have suspended their jet fuel exports, impacting neighbor Vietnam, which imports two-thirds of its supply from the two countries. With its fuel spigot turned off, Vietnam’s aviation authority last week announced cuts in domestic flights and may suspend charters. Elsewhere, refueling restrictions are being imposed in South Korea, while the Philippines has declared a "national energy emergency" and may start grounding flights. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global, pegged the flat price for jet fuel in Northwest Europe delivered via cargo at a record high of $1,842.50 per metric ton on Thursday, up $232.25 on the day. “Since the war broke out, jet fuel prices have been about twice last year's levels and have broken previous records multiple times,” Platts said in a commentary. <h3>Fast resolution to conflict needed </h3>Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight officer at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said in a market update Thursday that air cargo stakeholders were pinning their hopes on a fast resolution to the Middle East conflict. “Tariffs created uncertainty, but the fallout here is bigger because of the cost of jet fuel, the potential energy crisis and inflation growth,” he said. “Right now, the air cargo market is suffering from a supply issue, and this will be resolved, but the longer this recovery takes is going to determine if it becomes a much bigger demand issue. “Whether air freight benefits or suffers in the longer term is down to the length of the conflict and its outcomes,” van de Wouw added. He said cities like Dubai and Doha occupied strategic midpoints between the Americas, Asia and Europe, and have served as the growth engine behind the rise of super-connector airlines such as Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways. But their geographic advantage has now become a strategic vulnerability, with hub airports in the war zone becoming victims of the conflict. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="9012e6fb-929b-4707-8282-a10521bcf60e"></dynamic-object></div>Five weeks into the war, air cargo capacity in the region remains roughly 30% below pre-conflict levels, and the squeeze in supply is showing up in rates. Global air cargo spot rates in March surpassed 2025 peak-season levels, reaching $2.86 per kilogram, their highest since December 2024, van de Wouw said. “Will the increase in fuel prices dampen demand for air freight? Not immediately, but if this conflict continues in the longer term, then definitely yes because the world would be facing a much broader economic issue,” he said. Data from Xeneta shows the rate impact has been sharpest on outbound corridors from South Asia and Southeast Asia to the Middle East. Spot rates surged 50% to 100% in the week ended March 29 compared to just four weeks prior. The spike reflected a convergence of pressures: severe capacity shortages from heavy reliance on Middle Eastern carriers, near-doubled jet fuel costs and newly added war-risk surcharges. Spot rates from Southeast Asia and South Asia to Europe followed similar trajectories, given Middle Eastern carriers' dominance on those routes. By contrast, Northeast Asia-Europe lanes held up comparatively better as airlines deployed more direct flights to compensate. Rising fuel costs have pushed air freight rates from Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia to North America up by mid- to high double digits. South Asia-North America rates surged even higher, up approximately 75%, again driven by Middle Eastern carriers' significant share of that corridor, Xeneta data showed. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com.</a></div>

Rising energy prices are placing growing pressure on air freighter operators, with the soaring cost of jet fuel eroding margins and pushing part of the global fleet closer toward economic unviability. Global jet fuel prices have almost doubled since the Middle East war began on Feb. 28, piling additional expenses onto an operating component that before the conflict was already more than 30% of total costs. “For less efficient aircraft like the B747-400F, the math is getting tight,” Rotate analyst Archisman Acharya noted in a report. “Global average profitability is approaching breakeven, and on lanes without strong yield growth, margins have already turned negative.” The B747-400 freighter accounts for a significant share of global freighter capacity, with the trans-Pacific the most exposed trade lane at 22%. During the last comparable fuel spike in 2022, Acharya said global B747-400F capacity declined 12%. While the price of jet fuel has risen sharply, concerns are now growing over its availability, particularly in Asia. China and Thailand have suspended their jet fuel exports, impacting neighbor Vietnam, which imports two-thirds of its supply from the two countries. With its fuel spigot turned off, Vietnam’s aviation authority last week announced cuts in domestic flights and may suspend charters. Elsewhere, refueling restrictions are being imposed in South Korea, while the Philippines has declared a "national energy emergency" and may start grounding flights. Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global, pegged the flat price for jet fuel in Northwest Europe delivered via cargo at a record high of $1,842.50 per metric ton on Thursday, up $232.25 on the day. “Since the war broke out, jet fuel prices have been about twice last year's levels and have broken previous records multiple times,” Platts said in a commentary. Fast resolution to conflict needed Niall van de Wouw, chief air freight officer at rate benchmarking platform Xeneta, said in a market update Thursday that air cargo stakeholders were pinning their hopes on a fast resolution to the Middle East conflict. “Tariffs created uncertainty, but the fallout here is bigger because of the cost of jet fuel, the potential energy crisis and inflation growth,” he said. “Right now, the air cargo market is suffering from a supply issue, and this will be resolved, but the longer this recovery takes is going to determine if it becomes a much bigger demand issue. “Whether air freight benefits or suffers in the longer term is down to the length of the conflict and its outcomes,” van de Wouw added. He said cities like Dubai and Doha occupied strategic midpoints between the Americas, Asia and Europe, and have served as the growth engine behind the rise of super-connector airlines such as Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways. But their geographic advantage has now become a strategic vulnerability, with hub airports in the war zone becoming victims of the conflict. Five weeks into the war, air cargo capacity in the region remains roughly 30% below pre-conflict levels, and the squeeze in supply is showing up in rates. Global air cargo spot rates in March surpassed 2025 peak-season levels, reaching $2.86 per kilogram, their highest since December 2024, van de Wouw said. “Will the increase in fuel prices dampen demand for air freight? Not immediately, but if this conflict continues in the longer term, then definitely yes because the world would be facing a much broader economic issue,” he said. Data from Xeneta shows the rate impact has been sharpest on outbound corridors from South Asia and Southeast Asia to the Middle East. Spot rates surged 50% to 100% in the week ended March 29 compared to just four weeks prior. The spike reflected a convergence of pressures: severe capacity shortages from heavy reliance on Middle Eastern carriers, near-doubled jet fuel costs and newly added war-risk surcharges. Spot rates from Southeast Asia and South Asia to Europe followed similar trajectories, given Middle Eastern carriers' dominance on those routes. By contrast, Northeast Asia-Europe lanes held up comparatively better as airlines deployed more direct flights to compensate. Rising fuel costs have pushed air freight rates from Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia to North America up by mid- to high double digits. South Asia-North America rates surged even higher, up approximately 75%, again driven by Middle Eastern carriers' significant share of that corridor, Xeneta data showed. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com.

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo Carriers News

Air Cargo

Rising jet fuel costs challenging freighter viability as war enters second month

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

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

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

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

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

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SPRING SALE!

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

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

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

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

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


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

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

Upgrade Subscription

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

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

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

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

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

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

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News

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

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

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

Port News | Journal of Commerce

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

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Montreal Port chief Gascon exits abruptly after two-year tenure

Charleston looking for retailer shippers to revive port’s growth

FMC again rejects Maersk petition to waive notice period for emergency fuel surcharge