MSC in terminal switch as Nhava Sheva gets strong start to new fiscal year
The Phase 2 launch of PSA International operations in India’s Nhava Sheva (JNPA) port is ...
Facing an extra fuel bill of more than $2bn a year, as a consequence of the IMO 0.5% sulphur cap from 2020, Maersk Line set to introduce a new bunker surcharge mechanism.
“The cost of compliance with the new regulation will be significant, so the cost of shipping will increase,” said the carrier.
“In order to allow customers to predict, plan and track how changes in fuel price will impact total shipping freight, Maersk Line will introduce a simple and predictive bunker adjustment factor (BAF).”
To ...
Crew saved as MSC box ship, hit by 'monsoon' off Indian coast, sinks
Carriers react quickly to transpac demand surge, but rates remain muted
ONE opts for South Korean newbuilds to avoid hefty US port fees
New services and reinstated blanked sailings boost transpacific capacity
Congestion fear as US west coast ports brace for transpacific cargo surge
MSC Elsa 3 sinking – now the 'blame game' begins
After DSV 'cuts the cake' on Schenker acquisition, time for redundancies?
$2.1bn E2open purchase will 'catapult WiseTech into a different dimension'
News in Brief Podcast | Week 21 | GRIs and European port congestion
Air forwarders face financial uncertainty – but 'there are opportunities'
Houthis claim Red Sea safe for box ships not calling at port of Haifa
Shippers hold their breath as Trump appeals court ruling that tariffs are illegal
DHL expands agreement with Shopify – where does that leave Flexport?
Shippers brace for rate rise as smart phones expected to drive air cargo market
US importers stockpiling goods to avert autumn shortages amid tariff chaos
Handler Celebi mounts legal challenge to security clearance ban at Indian airports
Comment on this article
Hans-Henrik Hansen
September 18, 2018 at 7:43 amHmmmm….am I the only one sceptical about this approach? A few challenges (from the clients’ perspective):
1) So Maersk is not addressing the changing legislation, they just pass on to the clients – and even when Maersk address the changes and obtain lower costs then no part of this is passed to clients.
2) Different charges for different tradelanes. Will not exactly make it easy for clients to keep track of.
3) Difficult to see the correlation between the reefer multiplier and the actual additional costs for the reeffer electricity.
Would be interesting to join a current internal Maersk Values training to understand how values such as ‘Constant Care’ and ‘Humbleness’ are interpreted nowadays.
Mike Wackett
September 21, 2018 at 1:10 pmBut you have to admit Hans-Henrik that at least Maersk are being proactive – hopefully other carriers will also publish their proposals.