|
HALF
of freight forwarders surveyed by Lloyd's
List's Containerisation International feel
that container shipping line alliances have
not improved service quality.
A
large number of respondents thought the
alliances were all about carriers' profitability
and customer service improvements were secondary
to that.
Carriers
claim alliances will not only reduce costs
but will also improve service levels for
shippers by offering more port pairs on
the east-west networks, but shippers remain
sceptical.
Most
respondents of the annual Shipper Sentiment
Survey were not convinced that the emergence
of the 2M alliance between Maersk Line and
Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) was a good
alternative to the previously proposed P3
network of MSC, Maersk Line and CMA CGM.
Just
23 per cent feel that the failure of the
P3 was a negative development, but only
35 per cent agree that the 2M alliance,
which is to be a vessel-sharing agreement,
with no joint fleet centre, represents a
good alternative to P3.
The
2M alliance was viewed negatively by 28
per cent of respondents.
General
comments from shippers and forwarders highlight
concern that the P3 would have given the
carriers too much control of overall supply
and demand.
"I
can see the benefits from the carriers'
standpoint with lower operating costs but
from the shipper's perspective it would
probably have led to reduced competition
and higher freight costs," says one
respondent.
Those
that were more positive about the P3 alliance
hoped it would bring more stability to the
industry.
"I
felt it could actually stabilise the freight
market, as having the three largest carriers
working as an entity alongside the G6 and
CKYHE alliance could lead to a more structured
approach from carriers," said one.
"Maersk
and MSC together still represent a formidable
combination and there's little doubt that
this will lead to more rationalisation amongst
the other carriers which will likely mean
reduced capacity and higher freight costs,"
says one person.
Another
was concerned that the 2M alliance would
still reduce the overall number of services
available.
Those
that were more positive said that 2M would
help bring stability to container shipping
and also a larger network offering from
the carriers as individuals.
One
respondent made that point that while each
shipping line is able to expand its offering
by adding the networks of other carriers,
the overall industry-wide number of services
decreased as the shipping lines shut down
any services that overlapped with their
partners.
With
regards to consolidation, shippers and forwarders
seem to prefer the competition and spread
of services that having a large mix of global
carriers brings, with 69 per cent saying
they would not like to see a reduction in
the number of carriers as shippers/consignees
will end up with larger bills.
However,
having a large number has actually resulted
in a decline in service levels because shipping
lines have struggled to maintain a profit
and therefore service levels have declined
as they constantly chop and change services
in an attempt to make money.
Page 1 2
[Next]
|
