Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
Kansas City Southern Inc. (KCS), the Kansas City, Mo.-based railroad, is poised to significantly expand its presence in the U.S.-Mexico intermodal market, a move that could not only strengthen the railroad's already-bright future but could also reshape how freight gets moved in one of the world's most important corridors of commerce.
KCS, the smallest in both geography and finances among the five Class I U.S.-based railroads, differs from its peers in one other important way. Unlike the other four, which have focused on the nation's east-west landscape, it has built its franchise around north-south routes extending from the upper U.S. Midwest to multiple points inside Mexico. Today, KCS operates from the Twin Cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul—which it doesn't serve directly but through interline partner Canadian Pacific Railway—to the booming Port of Lázaro Cárdenas on Mexico's Pacific coast.
The KCS network, which encompasses about 3,500 route miles spanning 10 states, is the product of a series of alliances and acquisitions over the past 18 years that, among other things, has made it the only U.S. railroad that doesn't need to interchange traffic at the border.
Up to now, virtually all of KCS's traffic has been measured in carloadings. Intermodal activity has been a non-factor because KCS's Mexican intermodal infrastructure was not sufficiently developed to meet burgeoning cross-border demand. Since 2008, however, the railroad has invested about $300 million to upgrade its intermodal network.
The investments include $180 million alone to expand 100 miles of track on a key line segment between the Texas cities of Rosenberg and Victoria to the south, about 240 miles from the border. Other investments include adding an intermodal facility in San Luis Potosi, Mexico; upgrading intermodal capabilities at Puerta Mexico to the east; and improving intermodal operations at Lázaro Cárdenas.
Wide-open opportunity
Cross-border intermodal currently accounts for slightly more than 1 percent of KCS's overall traffic mix, but the business is "growing very fast," Patrick Ottensmeyer, executive vice president and chief marketing officer, told DC Velocity last week. Intermodal revenues in the fourth quarter of 2011 rose 29 percent from the same period a year ago, albeit off of a small base.
KCS is placing the same bet on its north-south intermodal routes that its brethren are making on
their east-west lanes: that it can convince shippers, truckers, and intermodal marketing companies
to divert freight from the highways and onto the rails. The potential payoff for
KCS and other U.S. rails in the market could be even higher on the north-south routes because the
U.S.-Mexico market is dominated by truck transport. Intermodal accounts for about 6 percent of the
total cross-border market, according to KCS's estimates.
Ottensmeyer said that between 2.5 million and 3 million truckloads annually move across the border over lanes that his railroad serves. Of those, about 40 percent exhibit the characteristics—namely a truckload move of 800 to 1,000 miles or more—that would make those loads viable for intermodal diversion, he said.
"We've talked to truckers and intermodal marketing companies, and they are very interested in the opportunities here," Ottensmeyer said.
Between 1 million and 1.2 million truckloads originate in or are destined for Texas alone, a key factor in KCS's growth prospects since one of its units owns track that connects the rail's U.S. and Mexican operations at its main border gateway in Laredo. Included in the unit's portfolio is the only rail bridge that links the two countries through Laredo and over which 40 percent of all southbound rail traffic crosses.
Trucks move about 62 percent of shipments through Laredo, and Ottensmeyer sees this as a fertile proving ground for KCS's intermodal conversion efforts. Demand is fairly balanced in each direction, he said.
"I don't see any structural impediment" to expanding KCS's intermodal business, said Ottensmeyer. The one obstacle Ottensmeyer sees is more financial than operational; because ownership of the cargo changes at the border, the financial terms of sale could be different and could cause confusion, he said.
Low-cost option
KCS's strategy mimics that of the four other main U.S. railroads, which are touting their domestic intermodal service as a viable alternative to a truckload market plagued by impending driver shortages, higher fuel costs, and highway congestion.
According to a slide in a 2011 presentation, rail transport from Monterrey, Mexico, to Chicago costs 40 cents per cubic foot, and has a six- to seven-day time in transit. Truck transport on the same lane has a shorter transit time—four to five days—but costs more than double that of rail shipping, according to the KCS presentation.
The combination of ocean and rail transportation from Shanghai, China, to Chicago would cost $2.91 per cubic foot and take up to 25 days in transit, according to the slide. One of the goals of the presentation was to showcase Mexico's economic vibrancy and to highlight the potential advantages for U.S. companies of "nearshoring" their manufacturing and distribution closer to their end markets, especially as an increase in wages for Chinese workers narrows the gap with their Mexican counterparts.
KCS is not the only U.S. rail with its finger in the Mexican intermodal pie. Union Pacific Corp. touches about 95 percent of all intermodal freight running in and out of Mexico, though it doesn't operate trains into Mexico and interlines at the border with Ferromex—a big Mexican railroad in which UP owns about a one-quarter stake—and with KCS's Mexican operations. UP says it is the only railroad with access to the six U.S. gateways in and out of Mexico.
BNSF Railway uses trucks to move cross-border intermodal traffic to and from its hubs in Los Angeles, Houston, and El Paso, Texas. BNSF's 2011 U.S.-Mexico intermodal volume increased 14 percent over 2010 levels, according to Krista York-Woolley, a company spokeswoman.
Because KCS's route network is limited relative to those of its larger peers, it relies on interchange agreements with other railroads to feed U.S.-Mexican freight to points along the Great Lakes, the Southeast, and Southwest. For example, KCS relies on Norfolk Southern Corp. to move freight between KCS's hub in Meridian, Miss., and Atlanta, and it uses UP and BNSF to interline traffic between its Dallas hub and Los Angeles.
Growing KCS's intermodal business to its optimal level, Ottensmeyer said, "will require partners."
RJW Logistics Group, a logistics solutions provider (LSP) for consumer packaged goods (CPG) brands, has received a “strategic investment” from Boston-based private equity firm Berkshire partners, and now plans to drive future innovations and expand its geographic reach, the Woodridge, Illinois-based company said Tuesday.
Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but the company said that CEO Kevin Williamson and other members of RJW management will continue to be “significant investors” in the company, while private equity firm Mason Wells, which invested in RJW in 2019, will maintain a minority investment position.
RJW is an asset-based transportation, logistics, and warehousing provider, operating more than 7.3 million square feet of consolidation warehouse space in the transportation hubs of Chicago and Dallas and employing 1,900 people. RJW says it partners with over 850 CPG brands and delivers to more than 180 retailers nationwide. According to the company, its retail logistics solutions save cost, improve visibility, and achieve industry-leading On-Time, In-Full (OTIF) performance. Those improvements drive increased in-stock rates and sales, benefiting both CPG brands and their retailer partners, the firm says.
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain” report.
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Freight transportation sector analysts with US Bank say they expect change on the horizon in that market for 2025, due to possible tariffs imposed by a new White House administration, the return of East and Gulf coast port strikes, and expanding freight fraud.
“All three of these merit scrutiny, and that is our promise as we roll into the new year,” the company said in a statement today.
First, US Bank said a new administration will occupy the White House and will control the House and Senate for the first time since 2016. With an announced mandate on tariffs, taxes and trade from his electoral victory, President-Elect Trump’s anticipated actions are almost certain to impact the supply chain, the bank said.
Second, a strike by longshoreman at East Coast and Gulf ports was suspended in October, but the can was only kicked until mid-January. Shipper alarm bells are already ringing, and with peak season in full swing, the West coast ports are roaring, having absorbed containers bound for the East. However, that status may not be sustainable in the event of a prolonged strike in January, US Bank said.
And third, analyst are tracking the proliferation of freight fraud, and its reverberations across the supply chain. No longer the realm of petty criminals, freight fraudsters have become increasingly sophisticated, and the financial toll of their activities in the loss of goods, and data, is expected to be in the billions, the bank estimates.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
A measure of business conditions for shippers improved in September due to lower fuel costs, looser trucking capacity, and lower freight rates, but the freight transportation forecasting firm FTR still expects readings to be weaker and closer to neutral through its two-year forecast period.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR is maintaining its stance that trucking conditions will improve, even though its Shippers Conditions Index (SCI) improved in September to 4.6 from a 2.9 reading in August, reaching its strongest level of the year.
“The fact that September’s index is the strongest since last December is not a sign that shippers’ market conditions are steadily improving,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release.
“September and May were modest outliers this year in a market that is at least becoming more balanced. We expect that trend to continue and for SCI readings to be mostly negative to neutral in 2025 and 2026. However, markets in transition tend to be volatile, so further outliers are likely and possibly in both directions. The supply chain implications of tariffs are a wild card for 2025 especially,” he said.
The SCI tracks the changes representing four major conditions in the U.S. full-load freight market: freight demand, freight rates, fleet capacity, and fuel price. Combined into a single index, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions, while a negative score represents bad, pessimistic conditions.