Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
By their own account, conveyor buyers are a pretty demanding bunch. When asked in a recent survey whether they were looking for speed, reliability, safety features or quiet operation, their answer was, in a word, yes. It's safe to assume that this isn't a population that's been agonizing over the tradeoffs between, say, speed and noise levels; the DC VELOCITY readers who answered the survey, which was conducted online last fall, have simply decided they want it all.
Not only do they want it all, but they also want it at a low price. When asked to rank various conveyor selection criteria, the survey respondents put purchase price and return on investment (ROI) near the top of the list, behind only reliability and functionality. (See chart.) Bill Hawthorne, vice president of conveyor manufacturer Hytrol, summarizes the situation this way: "Customers want equipment that will run faster and last longer—and not cost an arm and a leg."
Vendors tighten their belts
Those demands are putting the squeeze on conveyor manufacturers, which are already feeling the pinch of rising manufacturing costs and mounting research and development expenses. But in a market where competition remains fierce, buyers have little incentive to scale back their demands. "It is very definitely a buyers' market," says Leon Kirschner, president of TGW-ERMANCO, a material handling components and systems manufacturer. "There is substantial overcapacity in the conveyor world. It seems as though people who buy conveyors are able to demand more than they ever have in the past. There is a tremendous amount of price pressure."
At the same time, the demands on performance are escalating, Kirschner says. "We are scrambling to make equipment that is quieter and faster with greater throughput. Safety is a big issue. Another big issue is ergonomics." Customers, he says, want equipment that reduces lifting and other stresses that can lead to workers compensation claims. "Companies like ours have to be more innovative and have to outengineer the competition rather than trying to out-price the competition."
The continuing pressure to provide better, safer and more reliable equipment at a lower cost has led some manufacturers to take a closer look at their own manufacturing systems. Hytrol, a large conveyor maker based in Arkansas, is a good example. The company has rolled out a program for implementing lean principles in all of its operations.
"We've gone into a full-blown lean manufacturing mode to be more efficient, to get product out the door faster, but at the same time maintain quality," says Hawthorne.
Focus on total cost
Though price is never far from buyers' minds, manufacturers say some customers take a more enlightened view of it than others. Kirschner, for example, divides conveyor buyers into a couple of camps. "There are two types of customers," he says. "There's the sophisticated customer who thinks about the total cost of ownership and the less sophisticated customer who is not concerned about total cost, who says, 'Let's get an auction going.'"
But that may be starting to change. Several vendors report that they're encountering the auction mentality less often than they once did. Tim Kraus, a conveyor product manager at FKI Logistex, a large material handling equipment manufacturer, says he's seen more emphasis on total cost of ownership in recent years. "We see a shift away from purchase price toward total cost of ownership," he says. "Purchase price is important, but there is more emphasis on durability, mean time to repair, ease of maintenance, and reliability of the equipment. There is more emphasis on ongoing maintenance and how to minimize it."
Bill Hawthorne of Hytrol agrees. "Customers are becoming smarter about conveyors," he says. "They understand that speed has a lot to do with wear and tear and that you need the best components. They are looking for throughput. That's a big difference [from] the commodity buyer."
Kraus adds that he's also noticed a trend among buyers to approach suppliers with requests for a solution to a specific problem rather than requests for a particular piece of equipment. "They are not coming to us saying they need a belt-driven accumulator with photo eye sensors," he says. "They are coming to us with a problem and asking us to come up with a solution, keeping in mind the total cost of ownership."
Less is more
But that emphasis on total cost of ownership is also creating engineering challenges for manufacturers. Kraus, for example, says his company is constantly working to find ways to cut down on repair times and extend maintenance intervals. "The feedback from some large DCs," he says, "is they don't want preventive maintenance scheduled for any less than 60 days."
For a manufacturer, that translates to a demand to develop more rugged and reliable components with fewer moving parts. "We're trying to get away from chain and oil or anything that needs to have the tension continually rechecked," says Kraus. At the same time, he says, the company's engineers continue to work on ways to lock in photo eye alignment and maintain belt tracking.
Del Deur, manager of design engineering for TGW-ERMANCO, says his company is taking the same tack. "We are working toward simplicity," says Deur. "Fewer moving parts means a conveyor with higher reliability and one that is quieter. Our number one priority is to get the number of parts down. That is the vision. Simplicity is the way to go, but it is easier said than done." He explains that reliability is a particular concern for smaller DCs that have no maintenance staff.
TGW-ERMANCO Vice President Gordon Hellberg adds that reducing the number of moving parts also offers savings in installation and power usage and means lower repair costs.
At the same time, the need for flexibility in DC operations resulting from the development of agile supply chains has presented manufacturers with an additional challenge. Conveyor makers report that they're fielding more and more requests from buyers who want equipment that's easy to reconfigure as their operations change gears. "More of our customers are classifying themselves as having the potential for reconfiguration," Kraus says. "In that respect, we're trying to make things as modular as possible so that components can be unbolted and reconfigured."
They want it now!
If today's conveyor buyers have become more demanding, manufacturers say they've also become less patient. They expect fast turnaround on their orders, which creates additional headaches for equipment makers. "Our system delivery lead times are getting shorter and shorter every day," Kraus says. "Large systems used to have a turnaround measured in months. Now it's measured in weeks." That makes it tough for manufacturers to balance the work flow in their plants, he explains. "It becomes more difficult if we have several big jobs going on at the same time."
Hawthorne says that in response to the demands for fast cycle times, Hytrol now pledges to get its standard equipment out the door within four weeks of an order or it will pay the freight costs. The company is now looking to expand the program beyond its standard equipment, he adds. "We're pushing to even get our engineered products out the door faster."
A move by federal regulators to reinforce requirements for broker transparency in freight transactions is stirring debate among transportation groups, after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published a “notice of proposed rulemaking” this week.
According to FMCSA, its draft rule would strive to make broker transparency more common, requiring greater sharing of the material information necessary for transportation industry parties to make informed business decisions and to support the efficient resolution of disputes.
The proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” would address what FMCSA calls the lack of access to information among shippers and motor carriers that can impact the fairness and efficiency of the transportation system, and would reframe broker transparency as a regulatory duty imposed on brokers, with the goal of deterring non-compliance. Specifically, the move would require brokers to keep electronic records, and require brokers to provide transaction records to motor carriers and shippers upon request and within 48 hours of that request.
Under federal regulatory processes, public comments on the move are due by January 21, 2025. However, transportation groups are not waiting on the sidelines to voice their opinions.
According to the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), an industry group representing the third-party logistics (3PL) industry, the potential rule is “misguided overreach” that fails to address the more pressing issue of freight fraud. In TIA’s view, broker transparency regulation is “obsolete and un-American,” and has no place in today’s “highly transparent” marketplace. “This proposal represents a misguided focus on outdated and unnecessary regulations rather than tackling issues that genuinely threaten the safety and efficiency of our nation’s supply chains,” TIA said.
But trucker trade group the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) welcomed the proposed rule, which it said would ensure that brokers finally play by the rules. “We appreciate that FMCSA incorporated input from our petition, including a requirement to make records available electronically and emphasizing that brokers have a duty to comply with regulations. As FMCSA noted, broker transparency is necessary for a fair, efficient transportation system, and is especially important to help carriers defend themselves against alleged claims on a shipment,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.
Additional pushback came from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC), a network of transportation professionals in small business, which said the potential rule didn’t go far enough. “This is too little too late and is disappointing. It preserves the status quo, which caters to Big Broker & TIA. There is no question now that FMCSA has been captured by Big Broker. Truckers and carriers must now come out in droves and file comments in full force against this starting tomorrow,” SBTC executive director James Lamb said in a LinkedIn post.
The “series B” funding round was financed by an unnamed “strategic customer” as well as Teradyne Robotics Ventures, Toyota Ventures, Ranpak, Third Kind Venture Capital, One Madison Group, Hyperplane, Catapult Ventures, and others.
The fresh backing comes as Massachusetts-based Pickle reported a spate of third quarter orders, saying that six customers placed orders for over 30 production robots to deploy in the first half of 2025. The new orders include pilot conversions, existing customer expansions, and new customer adoption.
“Pickle is hitting its strides delivering innovation, development, commercial traction, and customer satisfaction. The company is building groundbreaking technology while executing on essential recurring parts of a successful business like field service and manufacturing management,” Omar Asali, Pickle board member and CEO of investor Ranpak, said in a release.
According to Pickle, its truck-unloading robot applies “Physical AI” technology to one of the most labor-intensive, physically demanding, and highest turnover work areas in logistics operations. The platform combines a powerful vision system with generative AI foundation models trained on millions of data points from real logistics and warehouse operations that enable Pickle’s robotic hardware platform to perform physical work at human-scale or better, the company says.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.
Progress in generative AI (GenAI) is poised to impact business procurement processes through advancements in three areas—agentic reasoning, multimodality, and AI agents—according to Gartner Inc.
Those functions will redefine how procurement operates and significantly impact the agendas of chief procurement officers (CPOs). And 72% of procurement leaders are already prioritizing the integration of GenAI into their strategies, thus highlighting the recognition of its potential to drive significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, Gartner found in a survey conducted in July, 2024, with 258 global respondents.
Gartner defined the new functions as follows:
Agentic reasoning in GenAI allows for advanced decision-making processes that mimic human-like cognition. This capability will enable procurement functions to leverage GenAI to analyze complex scenarios and make informed decisions with greater accuracy and speed.
Multimodality refers to the ability of GenAI to process and integrate multiple forms of data, such as text, images, and audio. This will make GenAI more intuitively consumable to users and enhance procurement's ability to gather and analyze diverse information sources, leading to more comprehensive insights and better-informed strategies.
AI agents are autonomous systems that can perform tasks and make decisions on behalf of human operators. In procurement, these agents will automate procurement tasks and activities, freeing up human resources to focus on strategic initiatives, complex problem-solving and edge cases.
As CPOs look to maximize the value of GenAI in procurement, the study recommended three starting points: double down on data governance, develop and incorporate privacy standards into contracts, and increase procurement thresholds.
“These advancements will usher procurement into an era where the distance between ideas, insights, and actions will shorten rapidly,” Ryan Polk, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a release. "Procurement leaders who build their foundation now through a focus on data quality, privacy and risk management have the potential to reap new levels of productivity and strategic value from the technology."