With Maersk and Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) having coupled up with a new mega vessel-sharing agreement (VSA) to replace the P3 alliance that was torpedoed by Chinese maritime authorities, CMA CGM will have to come up with fresh options after being left out in the cold.
Maersk and MSC have unveiled a new vessel-sharing arrangement called 2M that proposes a smaller market share in hopes the VSA will be more acceptable to all regulatory authorities.
2M, planned for launching next year, has a market share that compares well in size with the G6 and CKYH alliances and also has a much simpler joint coordination committee to monitor the carriers’ network on a daily basis, said Drewry.
The objective remains the same—to reduce costs by sharing assets more efficiently between Asia-Europe, Asia-U.S., and Europe-US. But as port rotations and vessel sizes are still unclear, it is not possible to say how their market shares will change, or how their savings compare with that envisaged by P3, said Drewry.
On the Asia-North Europe trade route, Drewry’s analysis shows that Maersk and MSC currently have a 32% share of all westbound vessel capacity, which is more than the 30% market share threshold normally allowed under the European Union’s consortium regulation, so will require close scrutiny. Only six weekly services are planned by 2M instead of P3’s nine, but the VSA will still be the trade lane’s largest.
From Asia to the Mediterranean, where four weekly services will be provided instead of the five planned by P3, 2M will have a market share of 42.1%, compared to P3’s 53.8%.
On the Asia-U.S. West Coast route, 2M is planning four weekly services, whereas P3 was expecting to run six. At present, Maersk, MSC, and CMA CGM share four weekly schedules. Between Asia and the U.S. East Coast, two services will be provided, the same as at present, but two less than planned by P3.
On the U.S.-North Europe route, 2M will operate three weekly services—the same number planned by P3. 2M will probably be the second largest alliance in the trade lane, after G6, in Drewry’s estimation.
Drewry speculates that, as 2M will not include joint marine operations, its service quality could be very different to that by P3. Matters that the two carriers would need to look into include schedule reliability, with MSC having consistently recorded a lower level of reliability, it continued.
“Maersk will want to continue its Daily Maersk service guarantees between Asia and Northern Europe, which could create further friction between the two new partners,” it added.
As for CMA CGM, Drewry thinks the box liner will “now have to seriously consider a closer East-West vessel-sharing arrangement with someone else, therefore, the most obvious candidates being UASC and CSCL.”
Both have recently ordered 18,000-TEU mega-ships, and have worked with CMA CGM in the past, noted Drewry, but added that the French carrier may have other options. “They may be needed, as CMA CGM has 28 ships of 9,000 TEUs on order, some of which are more suitable for North-South trades.”
Photo: cseeman
