Carrier reliability reaches new nadir in Q1

Ocean carriers need to worry big time. If they cannot fix the reliability problem they will soon be pre-empted by those who do.

Intra-Asia specialist MCC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Maersk Group, achieved a highly commendable monthly average on-time reliability of 75.2% in Q1

75% is not acceptable in supply chains, though it is called highly commendable. That means most are worse!!!

Anyone who offers premium service (like Amazon two-day) which is highly reliable will soon get all the business.   Maybe bespoke services with premium standard delivery will steal all the business. It can work both ways, too. Some 3PLs may be moved to partner with the premium services to boost volumes and guarantee better reliability.

By .   

logo  via Carrier reliability reaches new nadir in Q1 as premium services gain ground – The Loadstar

 
By   

logo  via Shippers push carriers toward bespoke container services to boost reliability – The Loadstar

Bigger ships, bigger ports an opening for 3PLs

This story indicates that 3PLs will provide the supply chain wisdom the ocean carriers and port operators  refuse to take on.  Look for more and more profitable intermediaries, rather than fewer, in ocean supply chains. They are not likely to be supplanted by blockchain systems.

By Gavin van Marle in Singapore 25/04/2018

logo  via Bigger ships and bigger ports an opening for 3PLs to revolutionise supply chains – The Loadstar

Alternative to risky IT investment for maritime firms

Here’s a great idea: why don’t we simply buy a 3PL?  It is a lot easier than developing all that wretched software ourselves!  Seriously, why isn’t consolidation of 3PLs and maritime firms a good way to extend services beyond the port and put them under the control of someone we can trust to (more or less) handle the movements the way we want?   It is a time-honored way to gain capabilities we do not have without doing the work of creating a new business.  Sure there can be some coordination issues, but are they as bad as Maersk has coordinating with IBM on their blockchain system?

Remember that providing coordination and visibility of information is mostly what blockchain accomplishes, and the jury is out on whether it can be made competitive with existing types of databases (which may also need improvement, to be sure).  And any of these systems is “permissioned” in blockchain lingo– there is a governor who is empowered to make decisions about who is allowed to use it.  None of them is truly decentralized for governance, as the Bitcoin advocates would have you believe; in that world, the miners (of whom there are now about 6 with a 75% share of all blocks mined) can exercise control whenever they want.

It comes down to trust. Who do we trust?  Central banks, or a bunch of miners?  Or are we happy enough trusting Maersk, or CMA-CGM and Ceva, or some other 3PL with our cargo, and prefer to argue with them over damaged or misplaced cargoes, rather than debate with some Ethereum sites about these issues?

I’m not sure how it will come out, but I don’t think it will be all one way or the other.

 
By 

 

logo  via CMA CGM’s swoop to take nearly 25% of CEVA is ‘a banker’s dream’ – The Loadstar

 

See also: CMA CGM will buy 25% stake in CEVA logistics, By April 20, 018