The, for years now, attempt of carriers to enter the
lucrative global forwarding market, in competition with NVOCCs and third party logistics
service providers (3PLs) is not succeeding. If one casts a cursory look at the
financial results of both players, he will notice that 3PLs are more stable and
robust, with consistently higher EBITs. The answer is simple: being asset
light, 3PLs adjust easier to demand and thus wither the downturns of the economic
cycle. In the opposite, carriers, in their strife for survival, build
increasingly larger ships, which they are unable to fill, and then sell,
wholesale, capacity to their competitors (3PLs). To me, this looks like giving someone the knife to stab you in the back. Is this a clever strategy? I wonder… HHThursday, November 12, 2015
Carriers vs. 3PLs: Being stabbed in the back?
The, for years now, attempt of carriers to enter the
lucrative global forwarding market, in competition with NVOCCs and third party logistics
service providers (3PLs) is not succeeding. If one casts a cursory look at the
financial results of both players, he will notice that 3PLs are more stable and
robust, with consistently higher EBITs. The answer is simple: being asset
light, 3PLs adjust easier to demand and thus wither the downturns of the economic
cycle. In the opposite, carriers, in their strife for survival, build
increasingly larger ships, which they are unable to fill, and then sell,
wholesale, capacity to their competitors (3PLs). To me, this looks like giving someone the knife to stab you in the back. Is this a clever strategy? I wonder… HH
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment