The choice was much easier a quarter century ago. If you had a small package to ship, you went with either the U.S.Postal Service (USPS) or United Parcel Service (UPS).
Then along came Federal Express, with an overnight delivery service, and Roadway Package System (now called FedEx Ground), which was the first to offer ground parcel service with package-tracking capability. Lured by the prospect of money to mine, others—most notably Airborne Express and DHL Worldwide Express—quickly jumped into the domestic express service game.
But that doesn't mean small package carriers own the market. Today, they're getting some competition from an unexpected quarter—the less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers. LTL haulers, which have adjusted their networks and upgraded their systems so they can offer time-definite delivery and tracking, are gearing up to beat small package specialists at their own game, especially in business-to-business shipping.
As a result of all the competition, shippers looking to move small packages today can reach any address in the nation, choose how fast the goods get there and obtain notification of their exact time of arrival. Also as a result of all the competition, shippers now have a lot more options to investigate—not only among the traditional small parcel carriers, but among LTL competitors and consolidators as well.
So many choices, so little time
The pantheon of small-parcel carriers is pretty familiar to most shippers by now. The grand daddy, of course, is the USPS, often the choice of customers who are interested in saving money. What's noteworthy about the Postal Service's offerings is the absence of extra charges: There is no extra charge for delivering to residences or for making Saturday deliveries, and there's no fuel surcharge. And even though the USPS does impose a fee for its pickup service, that fee is charged for the visit, not the number of pieces as is the case with many of its competitors.
Then there's FedEx, which offers a wide variety of services. Domestic offerings range from same-day, overnight, and two-or three-day delivery (FedEx Express U.S.) to one-to five-day ground delivery (FedEx Ground U.S.). International offerings include FedEx Express International (one- to three-day or four-to five-day service to more than 210 countries) and FedEx Ground International (day-definite service to business addresses in Canada and Puerto Rico).
Meanwhile, megacarrier UPS, already a huge player in both the domestic ground and air-express business, is looking to strengthen its foothold in the international small package market. The carrier, through its UPS Supply Chain Solutions division, launched its "Trade Direct Ocean" service in Brazil and China late last year. Under that program, which is popular among shoe and apparel manufacturers, the company works with vendors and manufacturers to prelabel small packages, which are then moved via ocean container to the United States. Upon arrival, UPS unloads the packages and immediately places them directly into its small package network.
Another major player is Airborne, which offers overnight, next-afternoon, second-day, and ground service as well as a deferred one-to five-day service. The company's recent focus has been on expanding its Web site, Airborne.com, to include a number of transactional capabilities. Shippers now can print their own labels, track shipments, schedule pickups and pay bills-all online.
Along with the national players, there are a number of regional parcel carriers. Eastern Connection, for example, provides parcel delivery services in cities from Maine to Virginia. Small by comparison to UPS or FedEx (it handles about 8,000 packages a day), Eastern Connection provides next-day service to most of its destinations.
Grounded
But the regionals are not the only carriers nipping at the traditional parcel and express carriers' heels. The LTL haulers are making headway among shippers that move large volumes of small packages to business consignees. The major carriers in the marketplace have reduced transit times on thousands of lanes and have tracking capabilities comparable to the parcel carriers'. For example, Roadway Express, one of the nation's largest LTL carriers, now offers services that historically have been associated with parcel and express specialists, such as delivery within specific time windows and tracking by its own PRO number, by bill of lading and by purchase order or booking number.
Yellow Transportation, another national LTL carrier, offers what it calls Exact Express, which provides time-specific delivery the same day or the next day. Its Definite Delivery services offer guaranteed on-time delivery for non-expedited shipments. As an added bonus, shipment status information is available 24/7.
Con-Way Transportation Services, a group of regional LTL carriers, also offers time-definite and day-definite delivery services. It provides a number of tracking options, including tracking via its Web site and tracking by bill of lading, purchase order, PRO number or shipper-specific identification number. Last month, the company introduced a service offering tracking information via e-mail.
Another player is national LTL carrier ABF Freight System, which provides a premium delivery service it calls Assured Service. That service guarantees delivery on the advertised service date by the shipper's choice of noon or 5 p.m. ABF also offers a non-guaranteed express service providing next-day, second-day or third-day delivery.
Even the multi-regionals have gotten into the act. For example, Old Dominion Freight Lines, a multi-regional carrier with direct service in 38 states, offers three levels of guaranteed delivery service. Its Speed Service Guaranteed provides a guarantee of delivery within regular transit times; Speed Service On Demand provides expedited service; and Speed Service Next Day Air provides next-day service in the United States.
Getting PO'd
But the traditional parcel carriers and their LTL competitors do not have the field to themselves. Companies that ship the bulk of their small packages to residences also have the option of using consolidation and mailer services. These services arrange for packages to move most of the way by truck before being deposited into the U.S. Postal Service's system for final delivery.
This can mean big savings for shippers. R.R. Donnelley Logistics Services, which is probably the largest of the consolidators, handling more than 150 million packages a year, says the service can save shippers up to 25 percent over other ground delivery services. This service is a variation of an older concept called zone-skipping, in which consolidators placed packages into either the UPS or the Postal Service delivery network at the end of the linehaul and near the point of delivery.
One event that has spurred the growth of the consolidation and mailer segment has been the development of tracking capabilities up to the point of delivery. Historically that was the weak point in the zone-skipping model. But in October 2001, Donnelley Logistics and the Postal Service integrated their tracking systems, allowing shippers to follow packages for which they had requested delivery confirmation.
Though Donnelley may be the biggest player in the market, it doesn't lack for competitors. Parcel/Direct, another package consolidator serving companies that ship to residences, began operations in 1998 and now runs seven distribution centers around the United States. Other players include Parcel Corp. of America, which began as a zone-skipping consolidator and now offers fulfillment services on the West Coast to direct marketers. PFI, also on the West Coast, specializes in daily delivery of parcels directly to 1,500 post offices (called "destination delivery units" in Postal Service jargon). Established in 1999 as PaQast Inc., it has aimed from the out set to establish a joint venture with the Postal Service to provide expedited parcel delivery.
What shippers want
Given the wealth of options out there for moving small packages, the question on everybody's mind is what shippers really want. You might think that all small package shippers want pretty much the same thing. But you'd be wrong. According to a recent survey by J.D. Power and Associates, what shippers are looking for varies markedly with the type of shipment. For example, the survey found that where ground service was concerned, shippers ranked "shipping & delivery" (that is, consistency of delivery and damage-free delivery) highest (51 percent), with "invoicing" a distant second (11 percent). Where international service was concerned, "shipping & delivery" again ranked highest (42 percent), followed by "value" (24 percent). But those survey respondents using air service saw things differently. With this group, "value" ranked highest (23 percent), with "shipping & delivery" a close second (19 percent) and "driver relationships" a close third (16 percent).
Other factors included in the survey were reputation, account executives, tracking information, communication, special services and customer service reps.
Though both air and international shippers gave "value" a lot of weight, that wasn't the case among ground shippers, who relegated it to seventh place (3 percent). Surprising? Not necessarily, says Curt Carlson, director of custom research for J. D. Power and Associates, which is based in Westlake Village, Calif. "Costs for ground service," he points out, "tend to be lower than they are for air and international services, which typically lowers expectations as well."
Not only did the J.D. Power survey look at attribute rankings, but it also asked its shipper respondents which carriers they preferred-though the research included only the traditional small package carriers. The survey found that participants (almost 1,000 shipping managers in companies with more than 10 employees that spent $10,000 or more a year on small package shipments) preferred the following carriers in this order:
Ground service: FedEx, UPS and the USPS. (Airborne did not have a sufficient sample to be included.) "Ranking between FedEx and UPS was reasonably close in this area," reports Carlson.
International service: FedEx, then UPS. Airborne and the USPS did not have a sufficient sample to be included.)
Air service: FedEx, UPS, Airborne and the USPS.
Suit yourself
Though the shippers surveyed by J. D. Power had definite ideas about which carriers deserved a place on their "preferred" lists, patterns of usage in the industry are much less clear cut. Some companies use different carriers for different DC locations, and some even use different carriers within the same site.
One such company is Acme Distribution Centers in Denver. "Our decisions in selecting small package carriers vary depending on the physical location of our distribution center and the physical attributes of the product, "says Doug Sampson, senior vice president. "In making the decisions, we look at service, price, technology and support. In other words, everything is customized. Certain carriers perform better in certain areas than others, and certain carriers handle certain pack a ges better than others."
The J. D. Power survey confirms that Sampson is not alone: "While there were a few surprises in the survey overall, the biggest one was that one size doesn't fit all," notes Carlson. "The industry works hard at creating a combination of services designed to meet everyone's needs. However, as seamless as carriers try to make those services, our survey has shown that shippers have many different expectations."
Raising returns
Parcel carriers, like most other businesses, suffered some setbacks under the double shocks of a stalled economy and the 20 01 terrorist attacks. FedEx Express's average daily volumes, for example, grew by a scant 0.3 percent in its 20 01 fiscal year (which closes at the end of May) and dropped by 5.8 percent in its 2002 fiscal year.
Though there are signs that some of the business is rebounding—FedEx Corp. reports that average daily package volume for FedEx Express and FedEx Ground was up 13 percent in the quarter ended Nov. 30—it's definitely not a universal. If you look at stats through the first nine months of last year, UPS's average daily volume of 12.9 million domestic packages lagged 1.8 percent behind the previous year's.
One way to offset falling volumes, of course, is to raise prices. And indeed, most of the small package carriers have announced rate increases recently. In November 2002, UPS raised its rates an average of 2.9 percent. FedEx raised its express rates by 3.5 percent and ground rates by 3.9 percent. Airborne followed suit, announcing rate hikes of between 3 and 4 percent for its various services. Those followed a 10-percent increase by the Postal Service for Priority Mail earlier in the year.
But that doesn't immediately or necessarily translate into a rate increase for all customers, says Donald Broughton, a transportation equity analyst with A.G. Edwards of St. Louis. " For example, customers who have contracts with small package carriers won't see increases for up to a year," he says, "and those who already have discounts will continue to get those discounts off the base rates."
Does a rate increase among parcel carriers give a pricing edge to the LTL carriers? No, says Broughton. "Small package carriers' decisions to raise rates won't hurt them in terms of going up against regional LTLs because the LTLs have been raising their rates, too."
Overall, LTLs have tended to use far less discipline in terms of not negotiating back all of their rate increases through discounts, he adds. "In other words, if you have a discount with a small package carrier that raises its rates, you will still continue to receive that discount. However, this isn't always the same with LTL carriers. For example, if an LTL carrier announces a 5-percent rate increase, a customer with a 50-percent discount may end up with a 52-percent discount."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."