Search

Twenty years ago, it was easy to classify companies such as Ryder/P-I-E, Consolidated Freightways and Yellow Freight System as less-than-truckload carriers: simply put, that was the type of freight they [...]

Shippers and shipping companies have differing opinions on the impact of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1995 on the transportation industry. Supporters of the proposed legislation contend that deregulation would promote stronger relationships between carriers and shippers, lower prices and relegate conferences to the task of formulating rules and a common tariff for smaller customers. On the other hand, those who opposed the plan believed that deregulation would strengthen shipping conferences, a development which could be detrimental to small shippers., Will maritime deregulation mean more freedom for shippers - or more power for carriers? While shippers and ocean carriers mull over the short-term impact of maritime deregulation, attorney Ron Cobert [...]

A PREVIEW OF THE SHIPPING ACT REVIEW The above question is precisely what will soon be debated by the presidentially appointed Advisory Commission on Conferences in Ocean Shipping. The group [...]

The political and economic reasons behind the reopening of shipyards in Japan are discussed. The impact of the move and the attempts to restructure Japan's shipbuilding industry in the face of stiff competition from Korea is examined.

The Republican Party's takeover of Congress has not affected the prevailing perceptions on deregulating the shipping industry. Interest groups such as the National Industrial Transport League continued to push for the elimination of the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) and its rules prohibiting confidential service contract negotiations. Republican legislators such as Rep. Herbert Bateman oppose the outright elimination of the FMC and other existing regulatory systems., Confidentiality of service contracts and retention of tariff system for common carriage remain the key issues. About the only things new at the recent House hearing on shipping-industry regulation were [...]

Rules for consortia A long-awaited EC decision gives a go-ahead for consortia to realize economies of scale in vessel and port terminal operations, but the EC adamantly opposes antitrust immunity [...]

The Shipping Act of 1984 As the President's Advisory Council on Conferences in Ocean Shipping completes its review of the Shipping Act of 1984, proponents and opponents of the legislation [...]

Last year, China was one of the few countries that still prohibited its banks from diversifying into other financial areas, such as mutual funds or insurance. That law changed in [...]

It has been over one year since the Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) of 1998 took effect, and the bottom-line question is whether OSRA has actually introduced more competition into [...]

OCEAN SHIPPING DEREGULATION MAY MAY NOT SHAKE UP TRANSPORTATION AS TRUCKING DEREGULATION DID, BUT IT'S RAPIDLY WASHING UP POSITIVE RESULTS. A mere 20 years after deregulation rocked the motor carrier [...]

The U.S. Shipping Act of 1984 sought to reduce government interference in the liner shipping market while fostering a more competitive environment for the benefit of shippers. A number of changes have been made in U.S. shipping policy. This paper outlines the evolution of U.S. shipping policies, the changes brought about by the 1984 Act, and offers an initial assessment of the impacts of the Act on carriers, shippers, marine terminal operators, and the conference system generally. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Companies seeking marine transportation now have choice of port selection on basis of services. Intermodal, minibridge, and microbridge modes have contributed significantly to availability of these services. Current maritime deregulation plans, especially user-fees, will intensify the competition among ports.

The Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 will revitalize the US shipping industry. The law will have the same impact in ocean shipping as deregulation did in air, road and rail transportation sectors. From the viewpoint of European shippers, the law enables cargo bound for the US to be shipped under conditions similar to those in other regions of the world. Shippers are also not bound to pay tariffs and contract rates that have been previously enforced by US federal authorities.

Trucking industry observers believe that shipping deregulation will affect the trucking industry in various ways. Gene Pentimonti of the American Trucking Associations, believes that intermodal truckers will benefit from deregulation. Dick Coleman of the Containerport Group of Cleveland believes that many ocean shippers will want to concentrate on their competencies and may want to have their inland transportation needs handled by others. Dan Smith, a consultant for the Tioga Group of Philadelphia believes that deregulation will cause shippers to reassess their role in the chassis business.

In the wake of ocean shipping deregulation, some shippers are considering focusing on their core assets by shedding their domestic and international double-stack train services. APL Ltd. is one such shipper looking to sell its stack train business. The company, which derives about $600 million in yearly revenue from its stack train operations, may be selling its train services to make up for losses suffered by parent Neptune Orient Lines. Many believe that other shippers could follow APL in selling off stack train operations.

The erosion of rates in the westbound container shipping traffic and the impending deregulation of the shipping industry has forced carrier APL Ltd. to withdraw from its membership in the Transpacific Westbound Rate Agreement (TWRA) shipping conference. APL is withdrawing four months ahead of the shipping industry deregulation schedule to prepare the carrier in negotiating contracts with shippers. The departure of APL from the TWRA is expected to result in the eventual dissolution of the shipping conference, with many of member carriers opting for the confidential rate negotiating provisions of the deregulation. The TWRA controls 367.8% of container shipping to Northeast Asia and 47.1% of the shipping to Southeast Asia.

Twenty shipping lines operating in North Atlantic trade lanes met in Amsterdam, the Netherlands on Oct 6, 1998 to discuss the implications of the new Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 in the US and the antitrust ruling promulgated by the European Commission. The ocean carriers, which have been losing money from the declining transportation rates in the North Atlantic are hard-pressed at looking for possible options for cooperation.

The Peruvian government is hoping to duplicate its success in the sale of its state-owned electric, telecommunications, and banking industries by starting the privatization of its major ports in 1999. The government will begin by privatizing operations at its Ilo and Matarani ports by December 15, 1998. The two ports, which represent only some 3% of the shipping industry, are forecast to bring in some $160 million in foreign investments. The local industry is hoping the management changes will generate more employment for the country's ports.

The Trans Atlantic Conference Agreement (TACA) is planning to devolve from a rate-setting conference into a rate-discussion body, pushed by competitive pressures from independent carriers and the implication of the deregulation of the US shipping industry. The rate-discussion function would allow TACA to be more responsive to the rate competition posed by independents, especially in the competitive trans-Atlantic container route, where freight rates have eroded by as much as 10% in 1997. The rate-discussion function would also allow TACA members to capitalize on the confidential rate contracts provisions of the US shipping deregulation.

The world's major container lines and the rate-setting conferences that carry the majority of the cargo on US Atlantic and Pacific trade routes have moved toward addressing a host of issues related to the shift toward deregulation. A petition for Federal Maritime Commission approval of what will be named the Ocean Carrier Working Group Agreement is awaiting decision.

The House of Representatives is set to approve a long-pending bill on shipping deregulation after some changes to its provisions. The bill, which is called the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, would allow shippers and international container carriers to enter into confidential service contracts for the first time. Some important provisions of the bill include the preservation of the Federal Maritime Commission.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde will evaluate the antitrust regulations governing the shipping industry in relation to a shipping deregulation bill under study at the Senate. The bill, which is called the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, aims to modify the status of antitrust exemption and industry regulation. The international shipping industry is currently exempted from US antitrust laws but regulated by the Federal Maritime Commission. If the committee will review the bill, legislation would be moved until the next House session.

The passing of the new shipping deregulation bill is expected to result in a very volatile market situation for shippers used to relying on rate-setting conferences for contracts. Rates of shippers, carriers, and exporters will become confidential under the new regulations, making transportation partnerships as a safeguard more enticing for firms. The new bill would enable carriers to negotiate confidential service contracts and afford them discounts.

House Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md), chairman of the House maritime commitee, is optimistic that the Ocean Shipping Reform Act will meet approval in 1998. The optimism is buoyed by the fact that the Senate version of the bill can pass House scrutiny with little alteration. The deregulation would allow carriers to negotiate confidential contracts with shippers. The only opposition to the shipping deregulation comes from freight forwarders who were left out in the bill's formulation. The passage of the bill would effectively limit the ability of freight forwarders to buy cargo space in carriers.