David Maloney has been a journalist for more than 35 years and is currently the group editorial director for DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly magazines. In this role, he is responsible for the editorial content of both brands of Agile Business Media. Dave joined DC Velocity in April of 2004. Prior to that, he was a senior editor for Modern Materials Handling magazine. Dave also has extensive experience as a broadcast journalist. Before writing for supply chain publications, he was a journalist, television producer and director in Pittsburgh. Dave combines a background of reporting on logistics with his video production experience to bring new opportunities to DC Velocity readers, including web videos highlighting top distribution and logistics facilities, webcasts and other cross-media projects. He continues to live and work in the Pittsburgh area.
To say that retailers are facing unprecedented challenges might be an understatement. After surviving the pandemic shutdowns, retailers met the challenge of surging consumer demand only to run up against a whole new set of obstacles: supply chain disruptions; runaway inflation; skyrocketing fuel and transportation costs; new, highly contagious strains of Covid; and a looming economic recession. All of this comes at a time when they are entering peak season. Many have stocked up on merchandise already, but are they the right products?
For some answers, we turned to Zac Rogers, an assistant professor of operations and supply chain management at Colorado State University. His primary research interests include the financial impact of supply chain sustainability, emerging logistics technologies, supply chain cybersecurity, and purchasing and logistics issues. He is also a researcher and co-author of the monthly Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, which tracks trends and developments in the industry.
Rogers earned his B.S. and MBA degrees at the University of Nevada, Reno, and his Ph.D. in supply chain management from Arizona State University. He recently spoke with DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney.
Q: We have seen how even the smallest disruption can ripple throughout our supply chains, leading to shortages and delays. There are so many things that could potentially go wrong this peak season. What do you think is going to happen?
A: Yes, we are in a funny place going into peak season. We have seen inventories climb at an unprecedented rate over the last six months. What that really has to do with is the fact that supply chains are so long-tailed—longer tailed now than they really should be because of things like shutdowns at Shanghai, congestion at ports, and overcrowded warehouses. Everything is moving more slowly. What I keep hearing from folks is that whatever your normal leadtimes are, you can expect them to essentially triple—so that what would typically take 90 days to produce now takes 270 days. These are really long leadtimes, and the inventories that we see now reflect an economy that no longer exists. They reflect the economy of 2021, when we had really hot consumer spending.
Q: Prices are high, and we’re seeing record inflation. What are retailers’ expectations this holiday season with such high inventories? Will consumers see many pre-holiday sales as a result?
A: Yes, I think there will be some sales.
The other thing, ironically, is that we already have some holiday inventories, as some of the things that arrived here in February and March were supposed to get here last November in time for the 2021 holiday selling season. Some companies actually held onto winter coats or apparel. We are already seeing some pretty aggressive selldowns at some retailers.
Another thing that often gets lost in the discussion is that a lot of the inventory we have isn’t ready to go. It is “work in process” inventory. For instance, there was a Wall Street Journal article about GM in the first week of July that talked about 95,000 units that weren’t going to be delivered on time. There is a lot of inventory like that, and it represents a significant investment. We are seeing a similar bottleneck with lithium batteries and things like that that tend to come from Russia and Ukraine. So, we have a lot of inventory that is not even sellable.
Q: What kinds of goods will consumers look to purchase this holiday season? Are we looking at durable goods, consumables, or entertainment and escapism as we have in the past couple of years?
A: I think entertainment and escapism will be a big piece of it. If you look at spending on services relative to durable goods, it has really shifted toward services in the last few months, partially because the lockdown is over. People can go on vacations. They can go to sporting events, concerts, and movies.
I would also anticipate some demand for electronics. People had a really hard time getting laptops, phones, and videogame systems during the last few years because of the semiconductor shortage.
Q: Although we want to be done with Covid, Covid is not done with us, and we could see more surges and shutdowns in places like China. What effect would shutdowns have on peak season?
A: Well, it would be pretty tough if we had another shutdown in China. I don’t really think we’re going to see widescale shutdowns in the United States partly because of the midterm elections this fall—I just don’t think that anyone is going to want to be the “shutdown guy,” honestly. With China, we have already had huge disruptions, and, honestly, we haven’t really seen the tail end of the spring 2022 shutdowns yet. We were still feeling the aftereffects of the 2020 shutdowns at the end of 2021, and then we pivoted right into more shutdowns in early 2022 in China. It is going to take us a while to work through those.
One of the things that have become clear over the last year is that supply chains are not something you can just turn on and off quickly. They take a long time to get moving again. When I used to work in a warehouse, everyone would go to lunch for a half hour, and once everybody got back, it still took 20 to 30 minutes for things to get moving again because you need goods flowing through the process. It’s the same with supply chains. It takes a while for them to get turned back on, and the sort of “stop, start, stop, start” pattern we’ve seen is terrible for us. If we keep seeing that, then we are going to continue to have big disruptions.
Q: Speaking of warehouses, the industry is still struggling with a severe labor shortage as peak season gets underway and the amount of inventory that needs to be shipped out starts to grow. What do you foresee for the labor situation, and is that going to present problems with delivering goods on time?
A: You are absolutely right about inventories. In our Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) “inventory level” metric, we were in the 70s for five of the first six months of 2022. Anything above 70 we would consider to be significant rates of growth because anything over 50 indicates expansion. Once you hit 70, you are really seeing a high level of growth. Before 2022, I think we were only in the 70s with inventory twice. It is moving really, really quickly.
That is also reflected in our “warehousing capacity” metric. With warehouse capacity, we have the same rules—anything over 50 indicates expansion and anything under 50 is contraction. We have been in the 30s or 40s now every single month since September of 2020. For almost two years, we have seen pretty significant rates of contraction in available space. That is due to the shift of warehouses, even though there are so many more warehouses now.
If you look at the warehouse absorption from 2021, a plurality of that was warehouses smaller than 100,000 square feet. Those tend to be urban warehouses. That is something that I think is often missed in discussions about warehouse labor issues. Yes, we have more warehouses than we’ve ever had, and there is more inventory moving through them, and it is more stressful than it has ever been, but they are also in a different place geographically. They are tending to go toward places where wages are higher.
Adding to that, the cost of living is rising at the fastest rate in 40 years. That is one of the things that are really driving the push toward automation in warehouses. We are seeing a huge boom in demand right now for fulfillment automation, any sort of robotic systems that can help supplement labor.
Q: Let’s take a moment to talk about trucking and the freight markets. CSCMP’s latest “State of Logistics Report” predicts a slowdown in these markets. We’ve even heard from some quarters that there may be a truck market collapse because of a buildup of capacity that now may not be needed. What is the near-term outlook for trucking and freight?
A: Well, peak season will be a godsend for some of the players—especially the smaller truckers. I know a lot of people are saying that 2022 might be like 2019, when we saw a virtual wipeout of the trucking industry. We had 3,000 carriers go out of business in 2019 and 2020. I don’t know that it’s going to be that severe, and there are a couple of reasons for that.
In 2017 and 2018, the economy was hot, and we had these huge orders for big Class 8 trucks. Plus, going into 2019, we essentially had an unlimited capacity to overbuild. We also had big orders for Class 8 trucks in 2020 and 2021. The difference is that because of the semiconductor bottleneck, we weren’t able to produce trucks nearly as fast as we wanted to. In some ways, the semiconductor shortage saved the trucking industry from itself.
As for transportation capacity, we tracked that metric in the Logistics Managers’ Index and again, any number over 50 indicates growth and anything under 50 indicates contraction. We had contraction in transportation capacity from July 2020 to March 2022, and then after March 2022, the diesel [price] shock happened and suddenly, capacity went positive. What is interesting, though, is that in June, capacity growth was lower than it was in May. So, the rate of growth was slowing down—to 61 in June. If you compare that to 2019, we are still not even close. In 2019, we saw the transportation capacity growth rate number go as high as 72, which indicated really significant rates of growth.
And then pivoting over to the metric of price for transportation: I think in June, we got down to 61.3 for transportation price, which is important because transportation rate growth is now lower than capacity, and when that happens, it usually means that something is going on economically.
As for what’s ahead, I do anticipate a lot of pain for smaller carriers. I think in the last week of June, the spread between wholesale and retail prices for diesel was about 73 cents per gallon. Smaller carriers don’t have the volume to buy diesel at wholesale prices. Their costs are much higher than big fleets’ costs. Also, the big fleets saved a ton of cash over the last two years because times were so good, they were able to put cash away. We are already seeing the big players start to absorb many of these smaller owner-operators. It is just not a level playing field.
Q: How do the higher fuel prices, capacity issues, and other factors affect shippers?
A: Every month we ask our respondents to do a future prediction: What do you think is going to happen across all of our different metrics? It is interesting. Over the next 12 months, our respondents predicted a growth rate of 59.6, so about 60 for transportation price, and that represents moderate, steady growth. This is the type of growth that we would consider sustainable. What that tells us is that prices are going to continue to go up, but at a mild and sustainable pace—one that won’t have us pulling our hair out the way we have for the last two years. In some ways, it could be sort of a relief.
Now, that growth rate probably reflects a move toward more contract carriers and less spot-market stuff, which again is harder for the little guys in the margins who are really relying on spot markets. But for the industry as a whole, what it seems like is that we are moving back toward equilibrium.
Q: How will rising interest rates affect our peak season?
A: I think some people have been hoping the Fed will ride in to save the day with inflation, but there is a great new tool out from the San Francisco Federal Reserve that individually tracks demand-driven and supply-driven inflation and helps to explain what’s going on. Supply-driven inflation is when price is going up really quickly, but supply is not going up quickly, like oil. Demand-driven inflation is when price goes up but then supply goes up, like apparel or footwear. If you look at the last three or four months, the vast majority of the inflation right now is coming from the supply side. It’s not that prices are just going up because consumers are spending money like crazy. Prices are going up because there is not enough supply to meet demand.
Now, back in March, April, and May of 2021, it was very much demand-driven. That was right when the stimulus checks came out, and the inflation we saw in early 2021 was really the result of consumers spending money on elastic goods.
The drivers that we’re seeing now are fuel and groceries. It is really the headline inflation that is supply-driven. People are not going to stop buying gas or food, so if the Fed raises interest rates, there will be some demand destruction, but it is going to be demand destruction of the things that weren’t really driving inflation anyway. That will make it even more difficult, I think, for companies to run down their inventories as quickly as they’d like because those goods sitting in inventory would be demand-driven goods that are being targeted by the Fed.
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."