How do we get in on this .... /sarc
Posted on 02/25/2020 12:30:35 PM PST by Rebelbase
Japanese carrier ONE has joined several of its liner peers in imposing a congestion surcharge on reefer containers destined for major Chinese ports.
Moreover, some carriers are preparing to declare force majeure and leave refrigerated containers at alternative ports.
With the coronavirus outbreak showing no signs of abating in China and still severely restricting landside operations at the ports of Shanghai, Ningbo and Xingang, reefer plug-in points are in extremely short supply, obliging carriers to discharge temperature-controlled boxes at other ports.
ONE has told customers it would apply a surcharge of $1,000 per reefer container, with immediate effect, “to cover additional costs related to the unexpected but necessary arrangement of shipments, and associated plug-in charges and monitoring fees”.
The carrier also said it may need to “adjust the original transport plan”, which could result “in the discharge of reefer containers at an alternative port without prior notice”.
ONE said it would endeavour to arrange relay of the reefer boxes to intended destinations, “subject to reefer plug availability”. However, it would be encouraging customers to consider a change of destination, “especially for time-sensitive cargo such as fresh, chilled commodities”.
Israeli carrier Zim and others have also announced immediate surcharges of $1,000, while CMA CGM will surcharge its customers $1,250 per reefer container. e,
MSC said it was invoking clause 19 of its bill of lading, which potentially gives it the right to leave goods at “any place or port which the carrier may deem safe and convenient”, and to receive full freight with any additional costs incurred for the shipper’s account.
The Loadstar understands that other carriers could follow MSC’s example if the crisis continues.
Meanwhile, insurers are bracing themselves for claims for spoiled contents in containers stuck on terminals in Asia for several weeks.
One marine cargo insurer source told The Loadstar he expected “an avalanche” of claims following the massive supply chain disruption resulting from the virus outbreak, and that, with the vast growth in reefer imports into China, potential claims “could be massive”.
“Unfortunately it is not just about plugging the boxes in,” he said. “A lot of the contents of reefer boxes have a shelf life and the goods will end up being destroyed and a total loss. We know from previous experience that claims can run into tens of thousands of dollars per single unit.”
Indeed, the Swedish Club agreed that damage to reefer container cargo was “both frequent and costly”, and because the cargo was intended for human consumption, “even minor changes in quality may cause authorities to order the complete destruction of the cargo”.
In a more optimistic note, CMA CGM said today that, “subject to further review”, it was planning to resume full operations at its network of offices in China from Monday 2 March.
It’s REEFER MADNESS again.
Interesting aspect I hadn’t thought of.
Beat me to it. :)
I can’t imagine why anyone would still be shipping anything into China.
Maybe some final shipments are arriving now, but business there effectively stopped 6 weeks ago - first for Lunar New Year and then for Corona-virus.
In a few weeks, there will be nothing coming in.
Can someone explain what this means in layman’s terms? What is a reefer in this context? What is the cause and effect of what is being described?
I wonder how much one of the refrigerated container costs. Cannot be cheap to just leave on the dock.
Chaos in the maritime shipping world - there goes the JIT formula - shortages like those now seen in northern Italian grocery stores will begin to become more common.
OK, gang. I’m going to take a “toke” at this, and render your drug-induced thoughts “up in smoke.”
“A reefer container is a refrigerated shipping container used to store or transport frozen or cold goods perishable items or goods that require temperature control.”
So now you know the full “dope” of the story, which was written in a trade publication with jargon specific to the industry.
I can’t imagine why anyone would still be shipping anything into China.
That’s why
If you are the logistics manager of the widget, you don’t ship to them if they tell you their factory is closed for 3 months.
Bad enough in itself, but the flow through and ripple down effects can be much worse as they impact other just in time pieces of the supply chain’s process stream
fine, the point is still the same - the end product still not made because there are no other factories in any other country that can make the part in needed volume or at all.
Interrupting continous-flow processes, especially for longer periods, makes for slow restarts, too.
Calling Sgt Stedenko...
At some point the dislocations become frequent and widespread enough that it bogs down the system to the point that completed items get stuck in the furball
Reefer is a refrigerated carrier of any type. Think of that pork chop that got pushed to the back of the frige, for a long time ...
Schweet!!
I think this corona thing is substantially stenchier than what is being reported. Not the deaths. The supply chain issues.
Usually a 20 foot container with built in refrigeration equipment. Can also be 40 and can be 10 foot and can also be a tank-tainer. Fully self contained. They can run out of fuel and become hot boxes. Stuff in them can go bad even while under refrigeration just like in your fridge. They can also be freezer containers. They are handled just like regular shipping containers by cranes, rail, ships and trucks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.