Panama Canal braces for El Niño, announcing first transit restrictions
The Panama Canal Authority (ACP) is to reintroduce transit restrictions as it prepares for the ...
© Eyewave
Container lines may have overshot in terms of calculating the optimum size of vessels as they sought economies of scale, according to a new Long Read from The Loadstar.
In advance of this month’s TOC Container Supply Chain event in Rotterdam, the decision of carriers to ...
Comment on this article
Gary Ferrulli
June 03, 2019 at 2:42 pmThe same criticisms were opined when US Lines built 4400 teus ships in the 80’s,
and then successively larger ships to meet market conditions in years to come.
Hindsight is always 20/20, or could be a blind spot in some peoples minds.
Martyn Benson
June 03, 2019 at 7:38 pmThis article talks about vessels of 18,000 TEUs being too large but we have already surpassed that with current vessels being in the 20,000+ range and COSCO saying they intend to build 25,000 TEU vessels. The ‘space race’ started by Maersk with the Triple-Es was intended to steal a march on the competition and provide hitherto unseen economies of scale.Instead the competitors were obliged to respond and the rates fell so the Triple-E gamble became a bridge too far for the container shipping industry and one which will have long-term ramifications for the shrinking number of carriers still big enough to command a global presence. In other words, we will be back to a volume game again to consolidate market share and remove competitors.
Enzo Esposito
June 04, 2019 at 11:19 amMax size ship should 14000 try suitableforthe newPanamacanal
E burning GAS
Theyshould run round the world service from far East to wcoasy thenpanama then exec or north Europe then med and more esdt then returning to far East
How much sea freight paying the goods from China to Europe
Is it worth to run efficiently with a non paying cargo ????
Owners should stop to compete for market share they have to compete for higher sea freight!!!!