Was the P3 Network Dead In the Water to Begin With?

By Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
June 18, 2014 - SCMR Editorial

The potential P3 partners –comprising ocean cargo giants Maersk, MSC, and CMA CGM – may have believed that they were just steps away from realizing their “network” dream. But industry insiders suggest that China’s veto power should not have been dismissed so quickly.

“China’s state-owned shipping companies, COSCO and China Shipping Group, were against the P3 operating agreement all along,” says Rosemary Coates, president of Blue Silk Consulting and author of Rules for Sourcing and Manufacturing in China. “Although the P3 alliance was similar to the airlines practice of code sharing, it represents a threat to China’s own shipping lines.”

Coates allows that the P3 alliance would have made the carriers more efficient and eventually drive down costs.  Indeed, P3 partners argued that this would be the outcome from discussing and agreeing on the size, number and operational characteristics of vessels to be operated on transatlantic and transpacific trade lanes between the U.S. and Asia, North Europe and the Mediterranean.

“But this would be too much competition for the Chinese lines, that have been losing money for several years and are struggling with over-capacity issues,” she says.
Coates maintains that this is just the beginning of China’s “showing muscle” on the world stage. 

“With the growing dominance of the Chinese economy, we are bound to see many more rejections of business deals that are unfavorable to Chinese business.”

Meanwhile, industry analysts believe that many of our world’s port authorities must be relieved. With the anticipation of massive freight aggregation, only the Mega ocean cargo gateways were anticipating more business. That would leave the smaller seaports battling one another for direct inbound carrier calls.

According to SeaIntel Maritime Analysis in Copenhagen, any terminal or port that were to be affected by P3’s network design “could potentially face huge losses or gains in their business.” This even included the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, as it had yet to be determined if one or both San Pedro Bay gateways was to receive Network calls on a regular or alternate basis. 



About the Author

image
Patrick Burnson
Executive Editor
Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review magazines and web sites. Patrick is a widely-published writer and editor who has spent most of his career covering international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He lives and works in San Francisco, providing readers with a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts. You can reach him directly at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Subscribe to Logistics Management magazine

Subscribe today. It's FREE!
Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage your
entire logistics operation.
Start your FREE subscription today!

Recent Entries

Even though some of its key metrics dropped sequentially from August to September, the outlook for manufacturing over all remains strong, according to the most recent edition of the Manufacturing Report on Business issued today by the Institute for Supply Management (ISM).

Company officials said that these planned changes, which will take effect on January 4, 2015, will provide for increases in current pay rates and reduce the time it takes for its nearly 15,000 drivers to reach top pay scale.

While the economy has seen more than its fair share of ups and downs in recent years, 2014 is different in that it could be the best year from an economic output perspective in the last several years. That outlook was offered up by Rosalyn Wilson, senior business analyst at Parsons, and author of the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) Annual State of Logistics Report at last week’s CSCMP Annual Conference in San Antonio.

Matching last week, the average price per gallon of diesel gasoline dropped 2.3 cents, bringing the average price per gallon to $3.755 per gallon, according to the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA).

A number of key topics impacting the freight transportation and logistics marketplace were front and center at a panel at the Council of Supply Chain Management Annual Conference in San Antonio last week.

Article Topics

News · Ocean Cargo · Shipping · China · All topics

About the Author

Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review. Patrick covers international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He lives and works in San Francisco, providing readers with a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts. Contact Patrick Burnson

Comments

Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.