The logic behind port mergers is more obvious in some cases than others. Of course the universal that connects the varying rationales is geography – whether that is about the ability of two ports to more efficiently serve a deeper hinterland together than either is ...
Keep our news independent, by supporting The Loadstar
Rapid transpacific capacity build-up continues – can USWC ports handle it?
Red Sea crisis has driven most new capacity into extended Asia-Europe trades
Crew forced to abandon ship in latest fire on vessel carrying EVs
Carriers on the hunt for open tonnage again as transpacific rates soar
The Loadstar Podcast | Transport Logistic and Air Cargo Europe 2025
'Now or never' for Kuehne and DHL GF to hit back at DSV
Uncertainty drives Yang Ming fleet boost as focus switches to Asia-Europe trades
Asia-West Africa ULCV deployment opens new markets for carriers
Project cargo: oversized and heavy, posing risks outside the norm for ports
CMA CGM eyeing multi-billion euro investment programme in Algeria
Carrier price hikes hold, driving spot rates higher as space gets scarcer
News in Brief Podcast | Week 22 | Trump’s tariff hurdle, ocean schedule reliability, and rate rise
Air cargo players still wary of long-term block space deals – 'a risk on both sides'
Longer-term planning needed as noise out of Washington distorts the market
Geely splashes out to meet growing demand by chartering its own car-carrier
Comment on this article
Ummo Bruns
February 24, 2014 at 3:28 pmThanks for this interesting article. Personally I am a great fan of ports working together, actually for quite some years. Unfortunately some ports seem to have difficulty to jump over their shadow when it comes to jointly explore and reach the hinterland. Examples Rotterdam/Antwerp or even nationally Zeebrugge/Antwerp: talking is one thing, but acting a different ball game.