Liner lay-ups loom as demand falls away

Sep 23, 2010, 9:09PM EST
Shippers had better prepare for another round of frustration as container carriers start to “manage” their capacity again.

By “managing” capacity, we mean laying it up, of course. Around 12 percent of the global capacity spent most of last year collecting barnacles in quiet waterways, and it looks like it’s going to happen again.

Not on the same scale, maybe, but the last quarter of this year will not see volumes near to those of the last quarter. Container lines have just started making money again and will not want to see profits circling the drain as demand for their ships dries up.

Cargo bookings for October have dropped off sharply, some lines report, and several carriers have been talking of withdrawing capacity from the Asia-Europe trade. With the size of the vessels on the route, the only place for them is lay-up.

Surplus smaller vessels on the transpacific may cascade into the busy intra-Asia trade, but that will have the same result – too much capacity, off to lay-up you go.

But as much financial misery as the slack season may bring container lines, their customers will also feel the impact. During the artificial capacity shortage engineered by the lines “managing” capacity last year, shippers saw freight rates soaring, cargo being rolled, peak season and other surcharges being hiked and they often ended up having to pay more for space despite holding signed contracts on agreed prices.

Shippers were rioting in the streets, firebombing shipping offices and overturning container trucks … figuratively speaking, of course. The point is that they were really annoyed at the disconnect between demand and available capacity that made shipping goods from Asia to Europe and the US such a frustrating exercise. Slow steaming, now a permanent strategy, didn’t make life any easier as it messed up schedules and forced shippers to radically adjust their supply chains, adding more than a week to voyages in some cases.

It is this prospect that is once again looming over shippers’ heads. Tightly controlled capacity by the lines so the smallest surge in demand – and let’s not forget that Christmas is coming up and maybe there will be a few late orders – will quickly create space shortages and all the ugly measures that come with it.

The carriers are currently profitable and should even finish the year in the black. Which is a good thing. As we have said before, profitable lines are happy lines.

Now imagine if they just had happy customers.

 
Report abuse



Bookmark this page to:Add to Faves Add to MyAOL Add to Simpy Add to Delicious Add to Live Add to Digg Add to Newsvine Add to Reddit Add to Multiply Add to Blogmarks Add to Yahoo MyWeb Add to Slashdot Add to Mister Wong Add to Spurl Add to Furl Add to Link-a-Gogo Add to Yahoo Bookmarks Add to Twitter Add to Facebook Add to Diigo Add to Mixx Add to Segnalo Add to StumbleUpon Add to Magnolia Add to Ask Add to Backflip Add to Terchnorati Add to Google Bookmarks Add to MySpace

Comments
Gary Ferrulli
Some good points, but incomplete and maybe it is a matter of space.
Let's look at facts - container volumes grew by 20% in the first quarter of 2010 vs. 2009, how did that happen if there were no space and no equipment available?
How many shippers/cargo interests told their carriers in the 4th quarter of 2009 that "we will have a significant upturn in business during the first quarter?"
How many Service Contracts are there with specificity regarding equipment availability, space guarantees and volumes that reflect any seasonality of movement? Even after all of the anguish displayed during the 1st quarter of 2010, when it came time to negotiate new contracts in April 2010, fewer than 35% of all service contracts have this level of specificity to them - why? Because most shippers have little confidence in what they are going to be shipping and won't commit to specificity.
I have clients who I have convinced that specificty and commitment is the only solution to their service requirements; others state that their firms simply can't commit to those requirements, so they don't - and guess what? They are the ones having problems.
Most of the problems of early 2010 have been resolved; not all of the blame is due to the carriers, but they do have blame when they do not uphold contracts that they sign (uphold the specificity of the contract), as do the shipper/cargo interest.
It has been over 10 years since OSRA was passed and the shippers got what they wanted, the ability to negotiate one on one with carriers. By now both sides should have enough experience under their belt to know what they require and to negotiate that into the contracts. I know for a fact that it is done, simply not enough.
10/7/2010 2:49:12 PM
 

Sign in

Latest blog comments

5/16/2012

Colin Henthorne
Thanks for your response, Dennis. You are correct that the...

5/16/2012

Dennis Bryant
From its commissioning until 1957, the LABRADOR was a ship ...

5/15/2012

Colin Henthorne
LABRADOR was decommissioned in 1962. In 1987, as a Coast G...

5/11/2012

CAPT SANDEEP KALIA
Dear Editor, Compliments for a very well written article...

5/7/2012

Murray Goldberg
Hey John - I think you tried to give me your e-mail address...

5/7/2012

John Douglas
email address

5/2/2012

Martin Rushmere
I must add a clarification to this. I am referring to the a...

5/1/2012

Dennis Bryant
John, You are swimming against the tide. Dennis

5/1/2012

Murray Goldberg
John - thank you so much! Incredibly we are approaching 130...

5/1/2012

Ricardo Allu
Send to pentamaq@gye.satnet.net