Has MSC signed up Maersk’s Toft as CEO? – FreightWaves

Could Soren Toft – who was the chief operating officer of Maersk
until Nov. 11 – have jumped ship and joined the Danish shipping
giant’s rival MSC?

Switzerland-based MSC, a partner of Maersk in the 2M alliance, refused to respond when FreightWaves asked if, as widely rumored, the 45-year old Toft will be announced as the company’s new CEO next week. Diego Aponte, the son of controlling shareholder Gianluigi Aponte, is the carrier’s current president and CEO.

Maersk CEO Soren Skou also refused to comment when asked about Toft this morning as he reported solid third quarter results for the container line.

A number of
shipping insiders contacted by FreightWaves said they believed MSC would make
the announcement that Toft would join the company in the coming days.

Speaking on
condition of anonymity, one said, “I can’t believe it, but I’m hearing that is
indeed the case.”

A ship manager
familiar with both lines said, “that is what I’m told.”

Another source
said, “It would be a good appointment, but walking into the enemy camp within
hours is more surprising.”

Simon Heaney, senior manager for container research at Drewry, told FreightWaves that if Toft does surface at MSC, then the
manner of his departure from Denmark-based Maersk will be the biggest shock.

“I’m quite surprised that Maersk didn’t insert some sort of
handcuff clause preventing him from joining a direct rival,” he said. “But it’s
actually quite common for top Maersk execs to take leading jobs elsewhere and
Toft certainly served his time.”

The Maersk mafia

The latter point was also noted by Lars Jensen, CEO of
SeaIntelligence Consulting.

“Not only is the Danish company – of course – run by one of their own people, but the CEOs of MSC, Hapag-Lloyd and ONE will also all have a background at Maersk.”

Jensen explained, “Rolf Habben Jansen (CEO of Hapag-Lloyd) was CEO
of Damco within Maersk from 2009 to 2014 and Jeremy Nixon [the CEO of] ONE was
Vice President in Maersk from 2005-2008 where he came in following the
acquisition of P&O Nedlloyd.

“These four carriers combined control almost 50% of the global container shipping capacity.”

A Maersk spokesman did not comment when asked if
Toft had defected to MSC but insisted the rumors were being fueled by a shipping website and were based
on “anonymous industry sources.”

He added, “As for the future of
Søren Toft, we do not have further to add to the announcement we shared on
Monday,” he added.

Toft ‘ghosted’ from Q3 results

The only mention of Toft in the third quarter results presentation by A.P. Moller – Maersk this morning was the following: “On 11 November 2019, it was announced that Søren Toft, COO, has left A.P. Moller – Maersk to pursue an opportunity outside the company. Søren Skou, CEO has taken on the responsibilities of the COO in the interim.”

Toft’s departure from Maersk was so sudden that his biography is
still listed on Maersk’s website. It notes that, prior to being appointed COO
in 2014, Toft “held various commercial and operational roles both in
headquarters, Germany and Indonesia before his appointment as Head of Network
Planning in Maersk, a position he held until 2014”.

It adds, “Søren Toft has also overseen the acquisition and
integration of Hamburg Süd. The deal closed in the fourth quarter of 2017, and
he is now Board Member of the Advisory Board in Hamburg Süd.”

More FreightWaves articles by Mike

U.S., India and other major trade partners demand compensation for Brexit-related trade loss – FreightWaves

At the World Trade Organization meeting in Geneva, major economic powers like the U.S., India and Brazil that trade with the U.K. have raised concerns on the uncertainty surrounding Brexit, as their commercial losses mount over the extension of the divorce deadline. 

While the spotlight on Brexit has largely revolved around trade complications that will arise between the U.K. and the European Union (EU), seldom have the disruptions that this decision causes to countries trading with these two economic powerhouses been discussed. 

The subject of contention is a WTO system called the “tariff-rate quotas” that currently allows member countries to strike specific tariff slabs on their imports – depending on the product and the volumes being traded. This has permitted long-term major trade partners to export goods at minimized tariffs, with certain products carrying zero tariffs. 

But with Brexit on the horizon, the dynamics behind this seamless trade arrangement with the EU falters as trade partners are unclear if they could hold on to their tariff advantage post-divorce.  

In the case of India, roughly 16.5% of its export value to the U.K. is clothing apparel, amounting to over $1.6 billion in trade. Large swathes of this market are taken up by small- and mid-tier businesses that are currently at a loss on how the tariffs will play out after the Brexit fallout. 

Australia has come out strongly against the erratically changing Brexit deadline. Australian authorities cited businesses that have stopped exporting beef and sheep meat, unsure if they would manage to hold on to their tariff rate quotas during Christmas – decisions taken based on the previously ordained Oct. 31 deadline. Australia further claimed that businesses had been visibly affected across every single extension that was given to the U.K. to muster a deal. 

For the U.S., it is about losing privileged access at reduced tariffs to the U.K. for exports like pizza cheese, pork and wine. “We will be quickly crowded out and face a loss of access to both markets,” said the U.S. in a statement at the WTO meeting. Brazil is not happy with the proceedings either, which is evident as the country stands to witness contractions on its soybean and meat exports to the U.K. 

New Zealand questioned the quota split post-Brexit, pointing out that it will be hard for WTO members to continue accessing both the U.K. and the EU markets like before. It asked both parties to sit together and create quotas that are explicitly reserved for WTO members to continue trading as before or to expand on the existing trade quotas to help foster larger bilateral growth. 

The tariff rate quotes also pose an additional challenge, as they are determined for the whole of the EU and not specifically for the U.K., which will no longer be the case after Brexit. Trading partners are concerned that dividing the quota would be an issue if either of the two parties decides to trample on the quotas of the other. This might lead to a lopsided advantage for either the U.K. or the EU, which might increase or decrease favorability of trade access to non-EU countries.  

Blaming this uncertainty, countries have approached the WTO for compensation from both the U.K. and the EU if the tariff rate quotas are not split in a way that benefits the two parties on either side of the English channel equally, while simultaneously making sure it does not hinder trade with non-EU nations. 

The current deadline for Brexit is Jan. 31, 2020, but the U.K. will go to vote on Dec. 12 as decided by the British Parliament and also continue holding talks with the EU to negotiate on a  deal. 

Maersk profits surge despite revenue contraction – FreightWaves

Maersk chose profitability over market share in the third quarter as the container shipping giant bolstered its bottom line on lower revenues.

A.P. Moller – Maersk (APMM) said its ocean container shipping division generated freight revenues of $6.373 million in the quarter ended September 30, down 0.9% compared to a year earlier. However, earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) climbed 12.6% in the period to $1.268 million.

The result was achieved despite the carrier’s average loaded freight rate declining 3.6% year-on-year in Q3 2019 and volumes increasing by only 2.1%.

Lars Jensen, CEO of SeaIntelligence Consulting, said Maersk’s third quarter performance was accomplished primarily through a reduction in underlying operational costs of 2.3% and offered further proof of the company’s “ability to continuously improve operational efficiency.”

He added, “Profitability measured as EBITDA margin increased to 17.4% – a tiny fraction ahead of Hapag-Lloyd.

“Both these carriers clearly exhibit a successful approach based on a ‘profits over market share’ prioritization. Especially when contrasted with Evergreen, Yang Ming and HMM, which are clearly still struggling with how to become profitable.”

Maersk said the total volume increase of 2.1% was mainly driven by a 4.3% increase in backhaul volumes, with headhaul volumes up just 1.2% in the third quarter. 

“Global volume growth was around 1.5%,” Maersk said in a statement. “The East-West volume decrease was led by North America trades due to trade restrictions, while Europe was on par.” 

The Maersk announcement also stated, “The North-South volume increase was driven by higher import volumes to Africa, while the negative demand in Latin America continued.“

APMM (CPH: MAERSK-B) reported group revenues of $10.1 billion in the Q3 2019, down 0.9% year-on-year, and EBITDA of $1.7 billion, an increase of 14%.

Maersk CEO Soren Skou said, “While the global container demand, as expected, was lower in the third quarter due to weaker growth in the global economy, A.P. Moller – Maersk continued to improve its operating results.” 

Skou, who has also taken on the role of COO after it was announced on 11 November that Søren Toft had left to “pursue an opportunity outside the company,” said the group had delivered strong free cash flow and a return on invested capital of 6.4%.

This was achieved as a result of “strong operational performance in Ocean, higher margins in Terminals and solid earnings progress in Logistics & Services,” he added.

APMM’s Terminals & Towage division posted EBITDA of $313 million, up 23% compared to a year earlier. Division revenues rose 5.8% to $986 million in the period.

The company’s Logistics & Services division recorded EBITDA of $94 million, up 34% compared to the third quarter of 2018. Revenues increased 2.6% to $1.622 million and were “positively impacted by increasing revenue in intermodal and warehousing and distribution, offset by declining revenue in sea and air freight forwarding and supply change management,” said a company statement.

The statement added, “Volumes in air and sea freight forwarding were negatively impacted by general weaker demand and year-over-year effects from strategic initiatives taken earlier in the year to exit some countries.”

As announced on 21 October, APMM now expects EBITDA this year in the range of $5.4-5.8 billion, up from its previous forecast of $5 billion

“The strong performance for the quarter combined with our expectations for the rest of the year, led to the recent upgrade of our earnings expectations for 2019,” said Skou. “We will continue our focus on profitability and free cash flow in the fourth quarter and into 2020.”

More FreightWaves articles by Mike

Hapag-Lloyd Q3 profits surge on higher freight rates – FreightWaves

Hapag-Lloyd (ETR: HLAG) posted significant third quarter earnings and revenue increases as it managed to nudge up freight rates.

The container shipping giant, which operates a fleet of 231 container ships with total transport capacity of 1.7 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU), saw revenues climb 6.2% in the third quarter to 3,244 million euros ($3.57 billion).

Earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) jumped 21.6% in the period to 253 million euros and, despite average industry-wide spot freight rates having been lower for most of 2019 compared to a year earlier, Hapag-Lloyd managed to claw a 2.7% increase in freight rates measured in USD/TEU from customers during the third quarter (see below).

Over the first nine months of 2019 the carrier’s results were even more impressive. Hapag-Lloyd posted EBIT of 643 million euros, up 115% from 299 million euros a year earlier. Revenues over the period totaled 9.5 billion euros, compared to 8.5 billion euros a year earlier, while transport volumes increased 1.2% to just over 9 million TEU.

Rolf Habben Jansen, chief executive officer (CEO) of Hapag-Lloyd, told FreightWaves by telephone this morning (Nov. 14) that “slightly better volumes, cost control and also better rates on average” explained the strong results.

“You need to get the best paying cargo onboard and we try to be quite active in that process,” he added. “We think we have done a reasonable job there, but having said that we’ve seen post-peak season spot rates coming under pressure. But right now they’re coming back up again, which is good news.”

The IMO 2020 challenge

One of the main challenges facing the container shipping industry in the coming weeks is the introduction of IMO 2020 low-sulfur fuels, which become mandatory under International Maritime Organization rules Jan. 1.

Hapag-Lloyd is in the process of retrofitting scrubbers on 20 vessels accounting for 14 to 15% of capacity to avoid the use of premium low-sulfur fuels. The carrier will also introduce an IMO2020 Transition Charge (ITC) for short-term contracts on Dec. 1. Earlier this year it introduced a ‘Marine Fuel Recovery’ mechanism to facilitate the recouping of higher fuel costs on longer-term shipping contracts.

Asked whether he was confident Hapag-Lloyd would be able to recoup the costs of low-sulfur fuels, Habben Jansen said customers had been understanding.

“I think it’s very clear that today we have to put one type of bunker in our tanks and tomorrow we have to put another type of fuel in our tanks and the difference in cost is about $250 per ton,” he said. “Everyone can see that. So people understand that our costs do go up and we have to adjust our prices. The initial reaction from our customers has been constructive.”

Asked if that would translate into 100% IMO 2020 cost recovery, Habben Jansen replied, “I think in the end we will be able to recover that cost. It may take a little while to get to 100%, but the attitude from the market has been quite constructive so I expect we will be able to recover that cost in 2020.”

2020: No sign of a demand cliff

Aside from IMO 2020, Habben Jansen assessed the key challenges facing the container shipping industry next year. “The main thing is what happens to demand,” he told FreightWaves. “We saw last year very strong growth in the market. This year growth is less, especially in the second half [of 2019]. I don’t expect a lot of growth when compared to last year which was very strong.”

He also said, “In 2020 we don’t see any sign that things are falling off a cliff, so I would expect to see some growth, but how much is too early to tell.”

Hapag-Lloyd has a “relatively modest” share of the trans-Pacific trade of around “5 to 6%.” Habben Jansen said as a result of the U.S.-China trade war, volumes from China to the U.S. had “definitely come down” but the carrier had also seen “markets like Vietnam, Indonesia and especially India to the U.S. develop very well.”

He added, “I think we have a small minus on the trans-Pacific but nothing too major.”

Share wars

Hapag-Lloyd’s share price (ETR: HLAG) has been on the rise for much of 2019 as its two largest shareholders, Klaus-Michael Kühne and the Luksic family-controlled CSAV, have battled for control of the line. Habben Jansen said this had not been distracting for executives.

“Two of our shareholders have tried to increase their shares as they both believe in their investment in Hapag-Lloyd and would like to have a couple of percentage more,” he said. “That’s one of the reasons the share price has developed as it has.”

He continued, “For us it’s not much of an issue because we see them [Kühne and CSAV] working together very well. I don’t think there’s a big dispute between then, they just want to buy a couple of percentage more.”

TTEU = Thousand TEU

For the full financial year 2019,Hapag-Lloyd expects an EBITDA (Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation) in the range of 1.6 to 2.0 billion euros and an EBIT in the range of 0.5 to 0.9 billion euros. “Based on the business development in the first nine months of 2019, it can currently be assumed that EBITDA and EBIT will be in the upper part of the guided ranges,” said a statement.

“This includes a currently expected earnings effect from the first-time application of the accounting standards IFRS 16 on EBITDA of 370 to 470 million euros and on EBIT of 10 to 50 millio euros. The effects of the first-time application of IFRS 16 are also currently expected to be in the upper part of the guided ranges.”

Trans-Atlantic upgrade

As FreightWaves’ Chris Dupin reported Nov. 13, Hapag-Lloyd has been taking steps to upgrade its trans-Atlantic services by adding a sixth ship to its U.S.-flag Atlantic Loop 3 (AL3) service that calls on ports in northern Europe and the U.S. East Coast and Gulf Coast.

The company said the additional ship “will improve the reliability of the AL3 service for our customers and support our strategy of being number one for quality.”

The Supervisory Board of Hapag-Lloyd has also appointed Mark Frese to the Executive Board effective Nov. 25, 2019. On March 1, 2020, he will become the new chief financial officer (CFO), replacing Nicolás Burr.

Frese, 55, was most recently employed as the CFO of Ceconomy AG, the former Metro AG. Before that, he held various management positions at Metro AG and Kaufhof Holding AG.

Nicolás Burr, 44, will leave the company Feb. 29 to pursue new projects in Chile. He began serving as CFO of Hapag-Lloyd AG in March 2015.

“During his five years with the company, Nicolás Burr has significantly contributed to its success, particularly when it comes to the mergers with CSAV and UASC, as well as the initial public offering that took place in 2015,” said Michael Behrendt, Chairman of the Supervisory Board.

“Nicolás Burr is among those responsible for the good financial position that Hapag-Lloyd enjoys today. We wish him all the best for the future.”  
More articles by Mike

TTEU = Thousand TEU

Tesla finally settles on Berlin for its next Gigafactory – FreightWaves

At the annual Goldene Lenkrad (Golden Steering Wheel) auto awards ceremony in Germany, Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, announced that the electric carmaker will commence plans on its next manufacturing hub – the Gigafactory – in Berlin. If the plans come to fruition, this will be Tesla’s fourth Gigafactory (the others are located in Nevada, New York and Shanghai). 

“Everyone knows that German engineering is outstanding, for sure. That’s part of the reason why we are locating our Gigafactory Europe in Germany. We are also going to create an engineering and design center in Berlin, because Berlin has some of the best art in the world,” said Musk. 

Musk has been a long-time proponent of Tesla building a European factory, because Europe is fast becoming one of the primary markets for Tesla. In its third-quarter filing last week, Tesla revealed that its U.S. sales declined to $3.13 billion from $5.13 billion in the third quarter of 2018. However, Tesla’s European market has remained indifferent to the global auto slowdown, with sales growing every successive quarter this year. 

It also makes sense for Tesla to look at Germany as a manufacturing location, because the country has traditionally been a leader in the global automotive industry. However, the German auto industry is in the midst of a slowdown due to situations surrounding Brexit and the trade tariffs tussle between China and the U.S., making a Gigafactory unveil godsent to its auto market. 

A major electric vehicle (EV) production hub in Germany also solves the country’s long-standing problems with pioneering in the EV space, as it did with diesel and gasoline vehicles. German auto behemoths like Volkswagen and Daimler are still recovering from the “Dieselgate” scandal that rocked the automotive terrain a couple of years ago, and are now channelling their energies towards the EV niche. 

For Tesla, setting up production in Europe helps it circumvent global trade volatility in forms of trade tariffs and political altercations, which have wreaked havoc on imports and exports in the recent past. The new Gigafactory will be built in the GVZ Berlin-Ost Freienbrink industrial park next to the new Berlin airport, which is under construction. 

“I’m excited for Gigafactory 4 because I think it’s going to light a fire under German automakers,” said Musk. 

Though the statement does sound somewhat conceited, Musk has a point. The German auto industry has been slow to focus on EVs, in a market that is increasingly enamored by the promise of electrification in both comfort and in reducing carbon emissions. Tesla scents a market opportunity and hopes to compete with German auto incumbents like Volkswagen, which is now emerging as a major player in the EV segment. 

Tesla’s acquisition of German manufacturing robotics group – Grohmann Engineering – in 2016, will help expedite the construction of Gigafactory 4. On the flip side, automation within the factory would mean a reduction in labor needs, which could result in minimal job creation in the region. 

“This is great news for our country. We have engaged in intensive discussions and good arguments. I am happy that Elon Musk has chosen our location Brandenburg,” said Dietmar Woidke, the prime minister of the state of Brandenburg, in which Berlin is located. 

At Gigafactory 4, Tesla plans to build batteries, powertrains and Model Y cars – which Musk has claimed will have a higher demand than Model 3. Tesla is also stepping up the pace of constructing manufacturing hubs across the world, with Musk envisioning as many as 10 or 12 Gigafactories in the near future. 

Shadow of Brexit fuels Dutch warehouse logistics boom – FreightWaves

The race to secure logistics real estate in key parts of northern Europe has been heating up ever since the U.K. elected to leave the European Union in 2016. It is showing no signs of cooling.

Notable investments this year alone include the €24 million ($26.5
million) purchase of a logistics warehouse in ‘s-Heerenberg by Aberdeen Standard in June, and the January purchase of a
logistics facility fully leased to XPO Logistics in Oss by Europa Capital for
€28.3 million.

At the end of 2018 Rhenus Logistics also opened one of the world’s most innovative distribution centers in the Netherlands, where it will further expand in 2020. And, more recently, Tigers announced it is building a new mega-hub near Rotterdam which will open in April 2020.

The latest investor to take the plunge is Tristan Capital Partners
(TCP) which plans to invest €150 million ($165 million) in the next year as it
builds up a logistics footprint in the Netherlands.

Tristan’s grand plan

TCP’s core-plus long-life fund, CCP 5, and local operating
partner, ARC Real Estate Partners, have already acquired two Dutch warehouses.
TCP calls the warehouses its first steps toward “assembling a logistics
platform consisting of medium-sized warehouses at locations across the
Netherlands.”

The two logistics assets, located in Oss and Uden, were acquired
for approximately €25 million. The Oss property has three tenants and was
purchased from Equity Estate. The Uden property was acquired in a sale and
leaseback transaction with the vendor, Beter Bed.

During the next 12 months, TCP said it would grow its Dutch
logistics platform to at least €150 million by targeting existing assets,
sale/leaseback transactions and forward purchases.

Target lot sizes will comprise assets greater than 10,000 square meters, with all assets “possessing institutional appeal from an occupational and capital markets perspective.”

The Dutch platform

As reported in FreightWaves, the U.K.’s exit from the EU (Brexit), now delayed until the end of January, has prompted a reconfiguration of the European logistics landscape, fueling a scramble for logistics properties in the northwest of continental Europe, particularly in the Netherlands.

One reason for the rush is that many shippers have been relocating distribution and storage capacity to continental Europe ahead of ‘Brexit’.

Anecdotal evidence that this trend is in full flight was readily
available on a fact-finding logistics tour of the Netherlands by FreightWaves
last month.

Brexit’s gift

Cuno Vat, CEO of Neele-Vat Logistics, a Netherlands-based
logistics provider, said that while the uncertainty around Brexit had been
confusing for business, new opportunities have emerged.

“We’ve seen a five-fold increase in requests from overseas
companies currently with setups in the U.K. that want to redesign their supply
chain. They are considering the Netherlands as a location and want us to be
their business partners,” he said.

Vat explained that during the 1980s and 1990s many companies from
North America and Asia established European bases in Great Britain to benefit
from the advantages of English as a first language, openness to immigrants, a
reliable legal system and relatively low taxes. Yet with Brexit threatening
labor shortages, customs checks and other transactional costs, many have
changed tack and are now looking to continental Europe for safe haven.

For some manufacturers, in the food industry for example, this is
a short-term risk management play – they are building up temporary inventory on
both sides of the English Channel to guard against short-term Brexit logistics
chaos, a threat that has now shifted to late-January when a damaging no-deal
Brexit remains an option.

Bye, bye Britain

However, others are making substantial, long-term commitments to
shifting large parts of their businesses out of the U.K.

Stan de Caluwe, senior supply chain solutions manager of the
Holland International Distribution Council (HIDC), told FreightWaves his
organization was in talks “with various logistics companies” about moving from
the U.K. to the Netherlands, transfers HIDC helps to facilitate.

“Many are starting with additional solutions such as a second hub
here and one in the U.K., then longer term are looking to move their European
distribution center here and will then service the U.K. from here.”

Eastwards shift

Wolfgang Lehmacher, a leading logistics consultant and the former
head of Supply Chain and Transport Industries at the World Economic Forum in
Geneva and New York, said the eventual departure of the U.K. from the EU would
have a major impact on the logistics landscape of the continent and the supply
chain strategies of shippers.

“When the U.K. separates itself from the world’s second-largest trade bloc, regardless of the efficiencies the U.K. may achieve at its borders, the barrier becomes an additional stop and incremental cost in the supply chain of a not so large market,” Lehmacher explained.

He continued, “So, of course, Brexit changes where goods are
manufactured, stored and how they are routed during the distribution process.”

Gateway appeal

As a result, Brexit of any form will erode the U.K.’s role as a
gateway to the continent, with manufacturers migrating production and
distribution of EU goods out of the U.K. to continental Europe. U.K. ports will
also lose volumes.

“Post-Brexit, the U.K. cannot function any more as a key entry and
exit gateway of the EU,” Lehmacher said. “Too many factors may hinder the
fluidity of the supply, ranging from administrative burden to potential delays.”

He added, “Flows of goods that can, will avoid the U.K. and U.K.
warehousing and distribution facilities will be closed and reopened in markets
in the EU, mostly in the Benelux countries where most of the EU distribution
centers are located.”

As the European supply chain and logistics map shifts towards a
more continent-centered model, U.K.-based European hubs will become the
exception. “The shift within manufacturing networks and transfers of European
distribution centers from the U.K. to the European continent will strengthen
the Benelux nations, Germany and France as logistical platforms in the world of
global commerce,” said Lehmacher.

Gravitational pull

De Caluwe also expects that as the center of gravity in Europe shifts eastwards post-Brexit, this will drive demand for storage and distribution capacity not only in the Netherlands, but also in western Germany and Belgium.

However, he takes the view that “the main entry points will still be in western Europe,” especially via the port of Rotterdam and Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, which will ensure the Netherlands maintains its prized “gateway” status.

He said interest in transferring operations was particularly
enthusiastic among the financial technology, health, life science and health
sectors. “Many have licensing issues if they aren’t located in the European
Union when Brexit happens,” he added. “So those companies are in a hurry.”

EU logistics migration

Jorn Douwstra, business manager for international trade and
investment at Rotterdam Partners, also confirmed the trend, noting that
financial and insurance companies had already moved to the Rotterdam area to
avoid licensing issues.

“We think that a lot of multinationals already have a plan to
move,” he said. “A lot of small businesses in the U.K. don’t know what to do
and are waiting until there’s a final decision on Brexit. And we see a lot of
mid-size companies trying to make up their minds.”

Douwstra continued, “If they have a large market share in mainland
Europe instead of the U.K., then for a lot of companies it’s beneficial to try
to open a warehouse here to serve those clients, especially if they ship goods
from outside the EU because you don’t want to have dual tariffs.”

More FreightWaves articles by Mike

U.K. retailer John Lewis to use cow manure to power its delivery fleets – FreightWaves

John Lewis & Partners, the U.K.-based chain of department stores, has announced that hundreds of its delivery trucks will switch to using biomethane as fuel by 2021, which is in line with the retailer’s pledge to power its entire delivery fleet with biomethane by 2028. 

A portion of the company’s fleet already runs on compressed natural gas (CNG). However, the push towards biomethane is a part of its overarching strategy to reduce its carbon footprint by progressively inching towards low carbon fuel. A complete transition to biomethane would result in John Lewis reducing its fleet emissions by 80% and save over 49,000 tonnes of CO2 annually. 

The biomethane that will power the John Lewis fleet will come from cow manure. The manure will be processed through biogas plants to extract methane gas. The process of converting cow manure into biogas involves anaerobic bacteria that digests the manure to release biogas over a period of time. 

However, what is exciting about biomethane is the abundant possibilities of producing it. Prior to its decision to use biomethane to fuel a large percentage of its fleet, John Lewis has been running 80 delivery vans on biomethane produced from food waste for quite a while now. The company also plans to step up the number of vans powered by food waste-based biomethane to 200 within the next 18 months, before eventually moving to cow manure-based biomethane. 

Biomethane is also a good substitute for electrification, which has not really taken off in the heavy-duty vehicle (HGV) segment that contributes 4.2% of the annual U.K. carbon emissions. Studies have found that swapping diesel vehicles with biogas vehicles will reduce carbon emissions by 85%. 

Extracting methane from cow manure saves the environment, because in the absence of a biogas plant, the cow manure emits methane into the atmosphere as it succumbs to bacteria. Methane is incredibly damaging to the ozone layer, as it is a greenhouse gas that is 28 times more potent than CO2

For its biofuel needs, John Lewis will be partnering with CNG Fuels, a U.K.-based supplier of renewable biomethane. “We want to help decarbonise freight transport and enable fleet operators to meet Net Zero targets now, supporting the U.K.’s climate targets,” said Philip Fjeld, the CEO of CNG Fuels. “Renewable biomethane sourced from manure is currently the best low-carbon solution for HGVs, but we want to be ready to support our customers when other technologies are commercially viable for freight transport.”

There has been a widespread call within the U.K. to limit diesel-powered vehicle miles as cities like London suffer from excessive air pollution. London created low emission zones to charge diesel vehicles for driving through neighbourhoods with fragile air quality. In 2002, the U.K. government established the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (LowCVP) that advocates for the reduction of carbon emissions in road transport and promoting low carbon vehicles and fuels. 

As expected, the John Lewis announcement brought in cheers from LowCVP. “With all the focus on electrification, the low carbon combustion fuels might be overlooked. But it is vital to remember that Net Zero can be delivered in a number of ways,” said Andy Eastman, managing director of LowCVP. “The LowCVP welcome genuinely zero or even negative carbon solutions which exist here and now and we must accelerate the uptake of these fuel solutions.”

Startup easing ecommerce returns logistics raises investment from Maersk Growth – FreightWaves

ZigZag, a London-based returns logistics startup, has raised strategic investment with Maersk Growth, the investment arm of shipping giant A.P. Møller – Maersk. The startup cashes in on the returns logistics economy, helping e-commerce retailers manage their returns without complications. 

The rise of e-commerce has parallelly led to the growth of product returns — a bitter pill to swallow for e-retailers, but an unavoidable part of an e-commerce transaction nevertheless. Though product returns have always had a place in brick-and-mortar storefront logistics, the rate of returns on e-commerce channels is much higher. 

Reports estimate that at least 30% of all products ordered online are returned, compared to storefronts that witness roughly 9% in returns. This could be due to various reasons like having received a wrong item, damaged products or because the product looks different from what was displayed on the site. 

E-commerce returns logistics is a lot harder, as it involves the e-retailer managing the logistics behind taking back the product, which is not usually an issue with a storefront as customers are expected to get back to the store for a return. 

Ever since the “Amazon effect,” businesses are increasingly looking to put customers at the center of their operations, leading to an escalation of consumer expectations with not just the speed of delivery, but also the ease at which they can opt for product returns. The e-commerce market continues to grow at over 20% annually, which invariably will compound the returns logistics problem in the years to come. 

“Returns have increasingly become part of the ‘new normal’ for e-commerce and multichannel retailers and returns logistics continue to drive significant cost, complexity and waste in the retail supply chain,” said ZigZag in its statement. 

ZigZag’s software platform addresses this issue by providing granular visibility into the returns pipeline while driving seamless coordination between service providers. Apart from simplifying the returns process for both the consumers and retailers, it also expedites the flow of returns, improves on customer engagement and returns options, while simultaneously cutting down on the costs and waste associated with retail returns. 

“We are delighted to welcome Maersk on board as an investor and strategic partner, as we continue our mission to provide a market-leading returns solution,” said Al Gerrie, the founder of ZigZag. “In addition to allowing us to reach more customers whilst remaining carrier agnostic, the funding and Maersk’s extensive reach and expertise will allow us to further develop our product offering to deliver even more value for retailers throughout the supply chain.”

Studies on ZigZag customer performance point to costs and waste reduction of up to 57%. The company also shortens parcel journey lengths by up to 65%, made possible by enhancing visibility across the returns supply chain and leveraging data to optimize operations. 

“We see significant value in the strategic alignment between Maersk’s position as a global leader in logistics and transport and ZigZag’s powerful returns solution,” said Ian Nolan, director at ZigZag. “ZigZag is a great example of a company actively decoupling commercial growth and value creation from resource constraints, enhancing productivity to drive competitive advantage. We welcome Maersk onboard as a fellow investor and look forward to working closely with them to continue to support the growth of ZigZag going forward.”

Q&A: TIACA’s new chairman talks trade wars, Brexit, digitization and the integrator challenge – FreightWaves

The air cargo industry has faced multiple headwinds in 2019. Uppermost has been uncertainty due to trade wars and Brexit, closely followed by – and linked to – global macroeconomic slowdown and strong competition from cheaper shipping options. But one man is optimistic about the ability of the air freight sector to meet the challenges it faces head on.

Meet Steven Polmans, the new chairman of The International Air Cargo Association (TIACA) and director of cargo and logistics at Brussels Airport Company.

Speaking ahead of the forthcoming TIACA Executive Summit and Annual General
Meeting to be held Nov. 19 to 21 at Budapest Airport in
Hungary, Polmans told FreightWaves that during his chairmanship of the
organization, he will encourage airfreight stakeholders to embrace
digitalization to help better weather future storms and challenges.

FW: We’ve seen muted European and U.S. demand for air cargo this year. What have been the main macroeconomic headwinds facing the sector and do you see any sign of a pickup?

Polmans: I think it’s a challenge
to find positive signs. The basic health of the world economy is really hurting
us, although sometimes it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. We as an industry are
really good at saying things will go down. But I think the biggest risk today
is the uncertainty.

FW: What are the main causes of this uncertainty?

Polmans: For example, the fact
that after all these years we still do not know what is going to happen with
Brexit. The fact that we do not know that if in two weeks from now China and
America could suddenly become big friends or we could be back in the midst of
an economic war. These kinds of things make it so difficult. The volume changes
we see at Brussels Airport, for example, on a weekly basis is the craziest
thing I’ve seen in a long time. You go from plus 10% in one week to minus 10%
the week after. So the unpredictability is really causing a lot of concerns to
everybody.

FW: How is the U.S.-China tariff war playing out in Europe?

Polmans: I think Europe should
and probably is benefiting a bit from this war because China is looking more
toward Europe instead of to the States. The real problem is people become more
reluctant to spend money due to the uncertainty. This creates an economically
more difficult time for everybody and that’s having its effect.

FW: Air cargo freight rates have been bearish for most of 2019. How much of this is the demand factors you mention and how much is down to the supply of bellyhold and freighter capacity?

Polmans: Rates are going down due
to lower demand rather than overcapacity. Nobody does air cargo out of free
will, because we are by far the most expensive mode of transport. People are
not suddenly going to say, “OK, this shipment in the past was fine in three
days, but now it can be done in 18 days.” It’s not that simple. I don’t think
that rates determine demand, it’s more vice versa. People use air cargo only
because they really need to. I don’t think that if rates fall 10% that suddenly
total volume will go up.

FW: We’ve had another Brexit delay until Jan. 31. How debilitating has this whole saga been and what happens next?

Polmans: I think more and more
people are getting convinced that Brexit is going to become reality, no matter
if there is a deal or not. When the deadline approaches in January, I think
that there will again be a buildup of stock and we will see more air cargo
demand because air cargo is a way to avoid possible traffic jams at the ports,
especially if you have food or medicine that needs shipping and is time
precious. But really, no one knows how Brexit will happen or when, there are so
many possible scenarios.

FW: What do you think of Brexit personally?

Polmans: For me the idea of
Brexit is disappointing. My personal opinion is that we are not making the
world a better place by going back to bilateral instead of multilateral
agreements.

FW: Turning away from Brexit, one of the issues we saw in 2018 when air cargo enjoyed very strong demand was a lack of slot capacity, most notably in Europe at Amsterdam Schiphol, but also elsewhere. When cargo is diverted to secondary airports which perhaps don’t have the hub-standard facilities, can this be a concern in terms of service and handling quality?

Polmans: I think that we — cargo
— are a little bit of the stepchild of the family in a sense that for most
airports, passengers come first, cargo second. For most airlines, passengers
come first, cargo comes second. For an awful lot of the forwarders, maritime
comes first and air cargo comes second. So for too many people in our industry,
air cargo is not their core business. For the ones for whom it is the core
business, they have to suffer because they can’t make a difference. By moving
to secondary or all cargo hubs, all stakeholders might get a bit more attention
or more dedicated cargo focus, as some of the airports might take it less for
granted and realize they have to fight for this traffic. And the new business
will at the same time allow them to invest and thus upgrade their facilities, infrastructure
and services.

FW: Does it grate on you when you see the integrators securing the capacity they need?

Polmans: We can complain about not getting slots when the integrators do. And that they charge more for the products than we do for traditional air cargo. But they also deliver a better, more transparent, service. They offer what we, as the traditional air cargo industry, say is not possible. We can only learn from them, as they do make more money, offer a better service, are more punctual. … Just copying their business model is not possible, but looking the other way is also not going to help us.

FW: What lesson should air freight stakeholders learn from the integrators?

Polmans: We all look at our
little fragmented part of the chain, not the full supply chain. And we need to
change. We can finger point and we can blame, but we really have to start
working together on solutions. We are not in an industry that gives us a lot of
time to have a three-year plan. Our strength is our ability to be agile and
flexible.

FW: Can the embrace of digitization help air freight escape this bunker mentality and provide more joined up supply chain solutions that are transparent?

Polmans: Yes, absolutely,
absolutely!

FW: How can this be achieved?

Polmans: This needs action on two
levels: I really think that working together on a digital level is really
important, but it has to be embraced also by working together on a physical
level. It has to be both or it won’t work. It’s like having a car and having
gasoline, you need to have both together to move forward. If you have a car
with no gasoline, you stand still. So yes, we need digital and a physical
collaboration to really start moving forward. If your truck is standing still
in line because of congestion and you see it on a screen, what’s the use? If
you see it digitally but your truck is still blocked, you still have no
solution. You need a physical solution and collaboration supported by a digital
tool. You have to communicate and cooperate.

FW: And how will TIACA work on that during your tenure as chairman?

Polmans: I think the only organization today that covers the whole cargo industry is still TIACA. We need to and we are transforming our organization so it better meets the needs and requirements of our members as well as the industry. In the past we were much more about working together on advocacy and networking, but today we really try to have content-driven programs to facilitate supply chain collaboration.

FW: How will your forthcoming summit in Budapest tackle these areas that need action?

Polmans: As TIACA always did, by
bringing together decision-makers from across the globe for constructive
reflection, sharing and discussions, through panel discussions, keynote
speeches, tracks and general networking.

FW: Will TIACA also be addressing the environmental challenges facing air freight?

Polmans: For sure. Air cargo is
going to be attacked on the environmental level, and that’s something we have
to be prepared for, which is why we are launching a sustainability program. I
think we would be very blind to think that if we keep silent it will go away
and nobody will notice it. We need to make sure that in 30 years from now air
cargo is still there but also that the actions we take are not counterproductive
for the next generation. We need to think how to be more efficient. How can we
be more environmentally friendly? How can we embrace collaboration? How can we
use innovation to become better?

FW: Can you think of anything — a particular policy perhaps — that air freight, or the airline industry, could adopt quite quickly that delivers in the short-term on sustainability or helps reduce air freight’s environmental footprint?

Polmans: An aircraft uses fuel
and makes noise. That’s not something we can avoid that easily. But if we look
at the air cargo industry, it’s not just the aircraft, it’s the trucks and the
rest of the logistics at either end. If we can reduce the overall footprint by
being more efficient, that’s a start. I think it’s very easy to always look at
the aircraft part of the story. However, the progress by Boeing and Airbus on
engines and airplanes has been amazing. If you look at a cargo apron nowadays
in Europe and you compare it to 30 years ago and the old converted aircraft we
had at that time, it is day and night different. The noise is hugely down also.
We have made a lot of progress, although very often it is not perceived like
that. So we need to improve on the environment, but we also need to communicate
our successes better.

FW: And finally, Steven, what gives you cause for optimism for air cargo looking forward?

Polmans: I am optimistic anyway and I am a strong believer that people not willing to change will disappear. When you talked about digitization five years ago versus today, there is now big progress. IATA, for example, is doing really good on air cargo, but it can’t change everything for us as an industry, we have to take our own responsibility too and work together with everybody where possible.

More articles by Mike

Volvo rolls out electric “urban” trucks in Europe – FreightWaves

Volvo
Trucks has started selling its “urban” electric trucks in key European markets.

The manufacturer claims the
models, which have no exhaust emissions and reduced noise levels, will help
meet the increasing demand for sustainable transport solutions in city
environments.

Sales of the Volvo FL
(gross vehicle weight 16 tons) and Volvo FE (gross weight 27 tons) have now
begun in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. The
start of serial production is planned for March 2020.

Asked about the rollout of the FL Electric and FE Electric models in more European markets and worldwide, a spokesman for Volvo told FreightWaves that interest was “huge.”

He added, “It is difficult to predict the speed of the development
on a global basis. It will depend on customer demand, battery technology and
cost, the speed of charging infrastructure development, regional and national
legislation and incitements for the industry to change to alternative
drivelines, such as electric trucks.”

Volvo has been trialing another “urban” e-truck, the Volvo VNR Electric, in the U.S. this year. That model has been used in distribution, regional-haul and drayage operations in California. Sales of the VNR Electric in North America are scheduled to begin in 2020.

Volvo claims the reduced noise levels of its e-trucks make it
possible to carry out deliveries and refuse collection in early mornings or at
night, helping to improve transport logistics and reduce congestion during peak
hours.

Company officials believe that e-trucks also create new
opportunities for city planning and road infrastructure. For example, an
e-truck can be used in indoor loading areas and environmental zones.

“Global urbanization requires
urban logistics and truck transport with zero emissions and less noise with
increasing urgency,” said Jonas Odermalm, Volvo’s Vice President of Product Line
Electromobility.

“With the Volvo FL
Electric and Volvo FE Electric we are able to meet both the strong
environmental demands as well as the high commercial requirements of our
customers,” Odermalm stated.

”The market is now ready for the shift towards more sustainable truck transport alternatives,” says Jonas Odermalm, vice president of Electromobility at Volvo Trucks.

The main challenge for
manufacturers is maximizing the payload at the same time as optimizing the
driving range.

“Volvo Trucks’ solutions will be
based on individual business needs that consider a number of parameters, such
as driving cycles, load capacity and route analysis, to use the battery
capacity in the most efficient way possible,” said Odermalm.

Volvo FL Electric
and Volvo FE Electric were developed in close collaboration with selected
customers operating in Gothenburg, Sweden.

“While customer feedback has been positive, we do recognize that charging infrastructure is still under development in most cities and we are working alongside both public and private partners to agree on a long-term strategy for the expansion of charging infrastructure,”  Odermalm explained. “But it’s clear that the pace of development of charging infrastructure needs to increase.”

More articles by Mike