Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
On Nov. 10, 2008, DHL Express announced that after six years of enormous losses,
it would withdraw from the domestic U.S. parcel market by the end of January 2009. The news stunned an industry that believed DHL
would scale back its U.S. presence but not end it. It wreaked
havoc on the small southwest Ohio town of Wilmington—population 12,000—where DHL's U.S. air and ground hub was located and where one in three households
had someone who worked there. And it left parcel shippers to the not-so-tender mercies of two companies: FedEx Corp.
and UPS Inc.
Much has changed in the past five years or so. DHL Express ended domestic U.S. operations on Jan. 30, 2009,
and the United States is to the company today what it has been for most of its 44-year history: one node in its vast
global network. Each day, international packages fly in and out of Cincinnati, where DHL Express placed its U.S.
hub serving international traffic after deciding it no longer needed a large operation in Wilmington to support a
scaled-back service. There, the planes link with 30 freighters operating for the company across a 90-city U.S. network.
DHL Express is much better off since returning to its traditional knitting, according to Ian D. Clough, who has
run U.S. operations since 2009. Profits from the U.S. business are "exceeding expectations," and revenues are growing
at a double-digit annual clip, Clough said. He would not provide specifics. "We are playing to our strength," he said.
Although DHL left Wilmington, it did
donate the facility, the nation's largest privately owned airport, to Clinton County, where Wilmington sits. Today,
one-third of the three million square-foot site is occupied; it is used mostly for aircraft maintenance and repair services.
About 1,000 people now work there, compared to 9,500 when DHL Express ceased operations.
Wilmington is still being marketed as an air logistics hub, and officials from the Cincinnati chapters of the
Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, the Warehousing and Education Research Council, and the supply
chain and operations group APICS will convene there on Dec. 5 to check it out. For the past year, Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL),
the Chicago-based real estate and logistics giant that is pitching the hub, has led an effort to clean out DHL's infrastructure
because it was built for a parcel operation and not as a logistics center. That involved, among other things, hauling away 5,000
tons of steel and dismantling 26 miles of conveyor equipment, according to David Lotterer, JLL's
vice president-industrial/supply chain & logistics solutions and the company's point man in Wilmington.
As for parcel shippers, they find themselves in an all-too-familiar spot: caught by what might be the most ironclad duopoly
in American business. When DHL left, it took with it the third viable option for shippers, and the lowest-priced one at that.
Since then, FedEx and UPS have dominated the nation's parcel market as have few companies have in any industry.
Regional parcel carriers are gaining modest traction. However, they control less than 2 percent of the market, according to
Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., an investment firm. These regional carriers have limited coverage areas but offer low pricing, and,
unlike FedEx and UPS, impose few so-called accessorial charges—fees for additional services beyond the basic pickups
and deliveries that dramatically increase a shipping bill.
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) has the resources to compete, but
it is primarily focused on business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce, and not
business-to-business (B2B). Shippers are also leery about working with USPS. More than half of the 48 shippers who responded
to an October 2013 survey by San Diego-based consultancy Shipware LLC said they probably wouldn't use USPS as an alternative
for the air and ground services offered by FedEx and UPS. The main reason cited by the shippers—who combined
account for $1.5 billion in annual parcel spending—was that it was too hard to do business with USPS.
EATING HEARTILY
Left alone in the shipper henhouse, FedEx and UPS have feasted. According to Shipware, from 1998 to 2005 FedEx's published
or "tariff" rates rose on average 3.06 percent a year for air and 3.05 percent a year for ground services. From 2006 to 2013,
its air and ground tariff rates each climbed, on average, by 5.28 percent a year.
At UPS, the contrast between the two eras is even more pronounced. From 1998 to 2005, average air tariff rates
rose 3.25 percent a year and ground tariff rates rose 3.16 percent a year. From 2006 to 2013, the rate of annualized
increases for both products roughly doubled, according to Shipware data.
But even those increases don't tell the whole story. For example, each carrier assesses a minimum charge for each residential
and commercial shipment moving by ground; both firms charged a minimum of $5.84, a 53 percent increase since 2006. For parcels
weighing between one to 10 pounds, the bread and butter of package shipping, tariff-rate increases have been significantly
higher than the average. FedEx Ground, the ground parcel unit of Memphis-based FedEx, this year raised tariff rates by 8.19
percent on shipments within that weight range, nearly doubling the 4.9-percent across-the-board increase, according to Shipware.
By contrast, FedEx's rates for ground parcels weighing between 71 pounds and the 150-pound maximum were 4.02 percent, Shipware
said.
Lest anyone think that FedEx isn't capturing much of the tariff bounty because many of its customers are under contract,
Rob Martinez, Shipware's president and CEO, said about half of the company's customers ship under the tariff. FedEx and UPS
representatives did not respond to e-mail requests seeking comment for the story.
Accessorials have also moved in lockstep. Each year, both carriers add new ones and increase the prices on those already
in place. The big kahuna came in late 2010 when the companies changed their formulas used to calculate a shipment's
dimensional weight. In virtually identical moves, each reduced their "volumetric divisor" to restrict the amount of
cubic space allocated to their customers for the same shipment weight at the prevailing rates. Shippers whose packages
fell outside the new physical parameters were hit with the equivalent of double-digit increases on their domestic and U.S.
export shipments.
Martinez of Shipware estimates the carriers have so far collected about $500 million a year in revenue as a result of
the change, with more coming once contracts get renewed or agreements that had stayed the impact of the adjustments expire.
Jerry Hempstead, who today runs his own consultancy and is a former top U.S. sales executive with DHL and predecessor
Airborne Express, which DHL bought in 2002, said DHL Express would have also gotten in on the action if it were still around.
However, its presence as a low-cost option might have mitigated the overall impact of the change, he added.
LIKES AND DISLIKES
Shippers say they are generally satisfied with FedEx's and UPS' operational efficiencies and level of service.
What they don't like is the carriers' opaque rate structure and their own lack of bargaining power. In the October
Shipware survey, 64 percent said it was harder to negotiate with the carriers than it was several years ago. They said
FedEx and UPS have no competition and are too focused on margin improvement than market share to cut shippers many breaks.
In addition, 83 percent said the recent general rate increases have been "too high."
Few of the respondents have used regional carriers, but about a quarter of those who had said they saved more than 31
percent over FedEx and UPS. Another quarter said they saved between 6 and 10 percent. Although most respondents didn't
care for USPS, about one-third of those who used a portfolio of its parcel services in order to be "modally optimized"
reported savings of 25 percent over FedEx and UPS rates.
Where the parcel market goes from here depends on the channel of distribution. The B2C segment, which is showing
substantial growth relative to the low single-digit growth of B2B, is being driven by large retailers like Amazon.com,
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., and e-Bay, just to name a few. They, not the carriers, will call the shots. USPS—which recently
announced a major revamp to its Priority Mail service in an effort to capture more e-commerce share—will be a more
formidable competitor to FedEx and UPS for B2C delivery dominance.
By contrast, in the B2B world, the status quo could long remain in place. "It is very difficult to build a
network and compete profitably against well-entrenched companies, as we found out," said Clough of DHL Express.
Martinez sees things differently, saying USPS is improving its B2B game. About one-third of Shipware's customer base,
which is comprised of B2B and B2C shippers, now implement USPS' shipping solutions, he said. One example is Priority Mail's
flat-rate pricing which could help minimize the impact of FedEx's and UPS' dimensional pricing changes on express shipments.
Martinez added that regional carriers like Chandler, Ariz.-based OnTrac, which operates in eight western states including
all of California, offer an increasingly viable alternative.
For many parcel shippers, a proper mix of geographically focused regional services, the relatively low-cost delivery
options from USPS, and the breadth of coverage and service consistency of FedEx and UPS will provide effective shipping
solutions at rates they can tolerate, he said.
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.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.