https://www.universalcargo.com/which-carriers-will-be-the-final-3-to-survive/ Freight Forwarding Company Wed, 08 Nov 2017 16:04:07 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.9 https://www.universalcargo.com/which-carriers-will-be-the-final-3-to-survive/#comment-178736 Wed, 08 Nov 2017 16:04:07 +0000 https://www.universalcargo.com/?p=8404#comment-178736 Jared, a couple of issues. First, focus on the word “global”, look at the numbers of vessels the carriers have or operate and
see who has the ability, absent Alliances, to be global. Maersk with over 700 when considering the order book and acquisition of Hamburg Sud. MSC
is next with far fewer vessels but enough to be global.
Cosco with the Chinese government pouring $26. Billion between last year and 2020 can be as big as they want. With the recent ordering of 20 vessels they will be the same size as MSC by 2020
ONE, much smaller than you might expect, by 2020 they will be 36% of the size of Maersk. CMA will be 40% larger than ONE, but
CMA is under a heavy debt burden and in my opinion someone who may be bought out or merged.
The top 10 are so top heavy the numbers 7-10 combined will be smaller than Maersk in 2020. The 10th largest will be 1/8th the size of Maersk .
My 3 is likely the same as yours; I don’t see ONE emerging in the top 3 but they will be around. Same with the Koreans, for the same
reason as ONE – market protection. Same can be said for Taiwan. I think European nations are comfortable with the current situation and know that
between Maersk, MSC and CMA if they survive, Europe is market protected.
Maersk and MSC merging? My instinct is to say NO. MSC is a very “family” oriented company in more ways than one. And they are heavily invested
in their cruise line. They have always been a mystery relative to access to capital, but regardless, they have emerged as a huge player and have hedged their bets with terminals and the cruise line. The only thing suggesting a merge with Maersk is the similarity of how Maersk purchased Sea-Land; first a joint service with a true combined operation BUT with a CSX ownership of Sea-Land that had many problems and used Sea-Land as an
excuse as to why the stock price was so volatile. But in the end CSX sold Sea-Land for a virtual song, eventually paying less than $825.Million. What a bargain in today’s world. So is AP Moller trying the same tactic, be in a joint service for several years and then buy the partner? I see huge problems with this happening in several countries, China being first. And MSC is not in the situation CSX was.
Interesting speculation.

]]>