default_image
© Khunaspix Dreamstime.

To read this article you need to subscribe.

Help us to continue to invest in award-winning independent journalism. For an introductory offer of just £70 a year, or £10 per month, get access to all our daily news stories and opinion. If you are already a registered user, please login below with your current account's email and password to subscribe. If you are not registered and want to subscribe, please register below to subscribe.
Current subscriber
New subscriber

Comment on this article


You must be logged in to post a comment.
  • Ted

    September 27, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    Someone, as I recall, defined what e-freight encompasses because they thought they are the ultimate authority in the matter and knew better, or whatever the reason; it wasn't any individual airline or forwarder. The documents which pose a challenge are those originating from the shipper that have little value or relevance to the carrier and only a bit more for the forwarder. If the hype was dropped altogether and instead 100% compliance for FWB transmission and whatever the airlines provide in return, free FSU and so forth were the target, it could become credible. Once achieved, additional documents could be added incrementally as electronic transmission in phase II or III. The stand-alone offering a-la Descartes for all currently specified e-freight documetns is great, except the fact that everyone using it would need to either make double entries or spend scarce funds on yet another integration piece.

Topics

IATA