default_image
© Khunaspix Dreamstime.

A new breed of international container terminal operators has emerged over the past few years to challenge established companies which have traditionally dominated the sector.

Localised players, such as ICTSI, SSA Marine, Eurogate and HHLA, have always had particular strengths in certain areas, but for almost a decade the container terminal operating industry’s four main global players have been ever-present in bidding for new concessions and privatisation opportunities – Hutchison, PSA, DP World and APM Terminals.

Now however, according to the latest ...

Please Register

To continue reading, please login or register for full access to our free content
Loadstar subscriber
New Loadstar subscriber REGISTER

Comment on this article


You must be logged in to post a comment.
  • Uwe Breitling

    December 09, 2014 at 2:27 pm

    ICTSI operates terminals in Asia, Australia, Africa, U.S., Latin America, Europe and Middle East. To classify such operations as ‘localized’ sounds a little bit arrogant or uninformed.

    • Gavin van Marle

      December 11, 2014 at 12:55 pm

      Indeed it does, but the definition is Drewry’s not mine. The analyst uses several methods to ascertain the “globalness” of an operator, and makes a distinction between global and international terminal operators. A lot depends on how much volume comes from particular ports. In ICTSI’s case, while it has operations across the world a substantial portion of its volumes are generated in its home country, the Philippines.

      • Uwe Breitling

        December 11, 2014 at 11:03 pm

        Hutchinson, PSA and DP World also generate substantial volumes in their ‘home countries’. So what is their difference to ICTSI? Size, volume handled and years in the business?

        • Neil Davidson

          December 21, 2014 at 9:32 am

          Uwe – “Localized” isn’t a term we use to describe ICTSI in our report. However, as Gavin says, we do analyse each operator to measure how “global” they are (and the reality is that most are “international” rather than truly global). Using our method of determining how “global” each operator is, ICTSI comes out similarly to PSA, TIL and CMA CGM (but not as global as HPH, DPW and APMT).