Application of "Signal and The Noise" to Predicting Freight Volumes

I am deep into reading Signal and The Noise by Nate Silver - This is the guy who almost perfectly predicted the outcome of the last election, state by state, while virtually all of the talking heads and big public polling houses go tit all wrong. I have not finished the book yet but so far it is a fascinating read.

So, why discuss this on a transportation, logistics and supply chain blog?  As many of you know, I am a closet forecaster.  I use my data I observe and report on in my Macroeconomic Monday feature to try to determine what will happen in the transportation markets.  I have my ups and downs and so far, however, I would say I have been far more accurate than the official transportation pundits (Magazines which are essentially paid for by the trucking industry, analysts who "cover" the industry but in reality are just trying to push stock prices up.. etc.) who have, for the last few years, reported a dramatic speed up in freight, a dramatic drop off in capacity and a huge inbalance driving rates up.  I am sure they will be right one day but for now, if you had listened to them instead of me three years ago, you would have been paying far higher rates than you should have been.

Nate Silver describes a phenomenon in the book which I think is one of the core reasons why some of my predictions have been just a bit more accurate.  The concept is that of being "Out of Sample".  What this means is people will apply previous history to future results yet they will not realize enough data has changed which causes their examples they are using to not be representative of the current situation.  So, the general belief that when the economy "heats up" there will be a problem with capacity fails to account for:

1. Growth in intermodal
2. Smaller packaging and product
3. Movement of people to cities
4. Software and collaboration models
5. 3D printing
6. The fact that more and more of GDP is not product driven but services and financial driven

And I am sure a lot more.  My point here is that those who just extrapolate previous history to the future are doomed to have a failed prediction - my predictions seem to be a bit better because I am accounting for changes the external environment and accounting for them in my models.  

To be clear, this may and most likely will change however for now I say (as I have for almost two years now) say that capacity / demand is fairly balanced and you should act that way.  In the words of John Maynard Keynes, "When the facts change, I change my mind".  I will keep my eye on the facts and will change my mind but one thing I will continue to work on is making sure I do not succumb to being "out of sample." 

Can We Finally Get on With Life? HOS is Upheld

Today it was reported that virtually all of the provisions in the hours of service (HOS) rule-making were upheld in court (again).  We should now be able to just get on with life, stop enriching the lawyers, and start planning our supply chains better.

What Does 1.7%GDP Growth Mean for Transportation?

This week the first look at Q2 GDP came in and the number was 1.7%.  Headlines were anywhere from "GDP Crushes Expectations" (Set  the bar low) to "GDP Hardly Booming but no swoon in sight".  The key factor for which headline you believe is what were your expectations to start with?  Personally, I am in the camp that regardless, 1.7% is very anemic growth rate, it will not solve our unemployment problem and it will keep our economy somewhat mired for a long time.

But, what does it mean for transportation?  I believe this is just another indicator to show demand is very tepid and will remain that way for some time.  Revisions for GDP growth in Q1 were revised downward which means my experience meter seemed to have a better handle on GDP than the experts (I just look around and talk to people - Q1 was clearly worse than people had said).  The Q1 number was revised down from 1.8% to 1.1%.  Last three quarters have been less than 2% growth in each quarter.

For transportation this translates into lower demand and while there may be a little bit of capacity issues due to hours of service (HOS), demand is going down faster than capacity so net-net we are at balance or, in fact, slightly over capacity.  In total we are seeing real overcapacity in intermodal as the big rush to get into that space has caused a huge container growth at the various IMCs.

The story from the transportation economists a few years ago was when you see 3% GDP growth that is when transportation rates will start going up.  Of course, they have now changed that tune since 3% isn't anywhere near possible in the near future so the fear game is on hours of service.

However, my advice continues to be:  Those who do not allow emotion, fear and "the government regulation boogey man" get to them will use real data to determine what is really happening.  They will find capacity is there, rates are steady and in some cases going down, and for the foreseeable future that will be the story.

Keep calm and be diligent about your data analysis and you will find, while low GDP is not what we want for other reasons, this is probably a good time to be a buyer of transportation.  If you stay calm while your competitors panic, you really can pick up some competitive advantage points during this period.

Awakening the Sleeping Giant - Crude by Rail

I am short on time as I am heading to the Alternative Fuels Conference (ACT 2013).  I wanted to give the light of day to this article on the growth of Crude by Rail (which I mentioned as a trend back here).  This has huge impact on the movement of crude and will likely impact the movement of retail goods.  Think about things such as priority of movement on track, where capital spending will go and the locomotive resources.

More to follow.  Be ready.. whatever industry you are in you will be affected by this.

Why Benchmarking In Its Current State for Transportation is Dangerous

I hear a lot about benchmarking in my travels and it makes me think about this idea, why it is used and what it really is.  What also fascinates me about the subject is the real forward looking business leaders never really care what their competition is doing.  The reason is they are so far ahead of the competition it just does not matter.  Could you imagine Steve Jobs worrying, wondering or working on what Sony was doing?  Would the iPod ever have been invented if Steve Jobs' goal was to be incrementally better than the Walkman?  Would the iPhone have been invented if his goal was to be incrementally better than the Motorola Flip Phone?

This is the danger of benchmarking.   When you benchmark you put a lot of attention on the current state and you tend to feel good if you are incrementally better.  But, that is not where true innovation comes from!  Real innovation and real "disruption" comes from thinking critically about the future, being imaginative and creative and thinking about things no one else has thought of.  That is where energy is best spent.

What I find about benchmarking is it is often an internal exercise to justify what someone is doing to higher management.  It is very rarely about anything else - have to prove to higher management that you are doing better than the other guy.  It is also incredibly inaccurate because there are so many external factors that effect the price of transportation beside just the zip to zip and the rate.  Here are some questions:

1. Do you compare with exact size and operating characteristics?  Sometimes I will hear of giant shippers presenting they are "better than market" based on their benchmarking through external agencies.  My question always has to do with expectations.  Of course, you are better, you are huge!  The question is, from a "should cost" analysis, are you as good as you should be?
2. What about your operating characteristics were taken into account when the benchmark was done?
3. Are you comparing prices of how freight is actually moved  or how it was bid?  I have seen this before where companies will send their bid data into the agencies that do benchmarking but that may or may not be how the freight is actually moved.  And, of course, how the freight is moved is what is most important.
4. And, my final question is this:  Why is everyone better than average?  How could that be?

There are so many people out there who are being told they are doing better than market in the benchmarking I am wondering just who is doing worse?  Someone must be... who are they?  I find benchmarking and Las Vegas have a lot in common -  everyone says they win when they go to Vegas yet somehow the casinos keep getting more cash than they know what to do with.  Someone must be losing.

My opinion is there is far too much energy spent on this topic and it actual restricts innovation instead of driving it.  Think about where you want to spend your time and think about whether this really adds much value or not around the edges.

I would advocate you should spend a lot of time on innovation and by definition if you are innovating you cannot benchmark... your competitors will be too far behind you to even matter.

More Signs of a Financial Economy; Not a Production Economy

On June 3 the Institute for Supply Management issued their May ISM index and it came in at 49.  Unfortunately, this means the manufacturing component of our economy actually contracted in May (despite all the talk of a manufacturing renaissance).  This is the lowest since November of 2012 and the lowest level since June of 2009.

Both the price index and employment index showed decreases as well.  This is aligned with the CASS readings of a relatively soft economy resulting in balanced, or slightly in shipper favor, rate environment.

My opinion is this is one reason why you are seeing the markets swoon back and forth as the economy is teetering between growth and contraction.  Every little bit of data could tip it in one direction or another. Expect continued contraction and caution in any type of growth which will continue to keep transportation capacity and shipments in balance.  We have evidence that rates are flat at best and could be falling and clearly intermodal / rail is taking business from trucking.

 One area where this is very noticeable is in the cross border moves where trucking is losing to rail.  This, of course, releases capacity to other areas for movement.  (see chart to the left)

Bottom line:  Economy is slow, shipments are down, and capacity is balanced.

February Cass Freight Index Supports 10xLE® Predictions

The February Cass Freight Index has been released and it continues to support and is right in line with what we have been predicting here at 10x Logistics Experts.  The market is soft and continues to bounce around the bottom which is holding rates flat for the data bases procurement experts.  The market continues to predict a 2% price increase at recent investor conferences this is what the transportation companies are planning for.

There are two interesting developments which are mentioned in the press release for this data which I believe should be mentioned (and which we have discussed for months here at 10xLE®).

First, we are seeing a bit of a divergence in truck ton miles versus expenditures which, as is stated by Ms. Wilson is due to "...Most likely...the average weight of a shipment rose during the period".  One of our counter balances we have discussed to the driver shortage is the "miniaturization" of goods which includes packaging.  You can move the same freight in smaller packs and thereby reduce the need for trucks.

Second, the increase in the type of activity in the economy which is driving what appears to be a rather robust economy is not the type of activity which translates to freight and transportation.  As I have said for many months, the magical "3%" GDP number is not the same 3% number from 20 years ago.  It does not translate into a lot of freight.  Google and Facebook don't move a lot of goods (physically that is).

Finally, in the report it is discussed the GDP prediction is still for a "Low, probably less than 3%" GDP number.  I am far more in the camp of a 2% GDP number with 2.5% being on the high side.

The bottom line for transportation procurement professionals:  If you had followed the 10xLE® procurement model and held your position you would not have paid "insurance" against capacity shortfall premiums last year as it has yet to materialize.

If you did buy into the hype and pay the premiums my recommendation is you try to identify the amount and get it stripped from your rates.  We still hold, despite promises, you will not get "benefit" later in the cycle for paying premiums now.

WebRep

currentVote

noRating

noWeight

Inventory to Sales Ratio - Will March Change the Curve?

One of my favorite measurements of business activity which actually relates to transportation volume is the Inventory to Sales Ratio.  As I get ready for January's numbers to be released I remembered I did not comment on December's numbers.  And, they tended to move as I would expect:

What we saw in December was that there was barely a move down which indicated the sales season for Christmas was not very good - which I had predicted since around September.  This, as is known for those procuring transportation services, led to excess capacity and very favorable procurement activities.

The key question is what will January show us.  My guess is not much and while we may get down to the 2010 / 2011 levels we will, most likely, not see enough of a change to effect the dynamics of the transportation capacity equation.  Companies continue to favor strict inventory management and good cash flow management over just about every other aspect of the balance sheet and income statement.  In the end, companies have learned it is better to miss a few sales than to be stuck with inventory.

The real interesting number will be released in April then May when February / March numbers are released.  Right now there is a lot of excitement in the economy and whether this will translate into a lot of buying activity is yet to be seen.

Right now all the data continues to hold that the transportation network is in balance at best and probably favors the shipper community.

Should Cost Modeling Comes to Logistics

I wrote back in January, embedded in another article about why people should do "should cost" modeling prior to negotiating rates.  This has caused me to do a lot more thinking about this topic and after doing some analysis I have come to the realization this is the best way to get to what the true cost of freight should be.

It also eliminates all the emotion, speculation and hype of the industry when you read about capacity constraints, driver shortages and other macro economic issues.  Here are the basics:

1. Break down your suppliers costs into the big driving buckets.  For transportation it is clearly fuel, driver wages and equipment.
2. Make sure you have calculated in offsets to costs.  For example, the industry is very prone to discuss how much more the acquisition cost  of equipment is with new emissions requirements and other adds.  However, they very rarely (unless you conduct deep research) discuss the vast reduction in operating costs due to better maintenance and fuel consumption.  Each element has to be accounted for. 
3. Ask what is really going on with driver wages (not what "could" happen).  Many will say the driver shortages will lead to higher driver wages however this has not really panned out.  So, find out what is really going on with the driver wages. 

This does not mean you are trying to ensure the supplier does not make a profit. What it does ensure is you fully understand the true costs driving the pricing, it ensures you understand what the reasonable profit margin is and it ensures you understand what the market is for the products you are buying. 

This process has been used by direct procurement people for years.  Also, I can assure you this is the process your transportation suppliers are using to decide how much to pay for a truck, trailer or container.  There are different components to measure but the process of "should cost" modeling is exactly the process they follow.  You should not be afraid of it nor should you be ashamed of using it. 

2012 Was A Good Year for Shippers Who Used Analysis Over Emotion

Despite all the noise about how CSA, regulations and a surging economy would create a massive deficit in capacity, what we saw in 2012 was a very shipper friendly environment for those shippers who did not let their emotions runaway with them.  If you stood fast, watched the data and understood the market you were able to reap some pretty good rewards in 2012.  The ATA truck tonnage report even showed a reduction year over year in December.

Bob Costello, economist for the ATA was even quoted as saying in 2013 the outlook is for a sluggish truckload environment.  My personal believe is the rules of good transportation management and procurement management don't change much.  Some highlights are:

• Always conduct should costing before talking rates.  Understand the costs of every component (Equipment, driver wages, fuel etc.) and the best in class purchasers will know those costs as well as the person across the table. 
• Don't let emotions and the industry hype sway you.  Stay focused with the data.
• Understand your personal procurement situation.  Even if the market is "on fire" if you have counter freight to the prevailing freight flows you are in the driver's seat. 

I had one person tell me a long time ago that transparency and accuracy will always prevail in costing and I believe them to be right. 

More Impact of 3D Printing - Nokia Gets in The Game

I have written about 3D printing many times and its impact on the transportation industry (read:  Soon a lot less will need to be transported).  Of course, this is a way away and most people I talk to aren't overly worried about it.  "Not in my lifetime" is what I hear most.  This reminds me of the discussions people had in the '80s when we said email will take over communications.  And, we all know what happened there.

Now we see Nokia is issuing standards so people can print their own covers using 3D printers.  This has massive implications.  First, a lot less product will need to be shipped.  Yes, I know these are small but soon it will be bigger and bigger product.  "Designed in California" will be printed and the item will be made on the spot and on demand. Transportation demand will decrease dramatically.

Second, it truly will mean "mass customization".  Mass customization has been a dream for a long time where people have predicted the benefits of large scale batch production coming to products which are made for a consumer of one.  In effect, this will be what 3D printing does.

Finally, it will put a lot of manufacturers out of business in total.  I essentially will make the product myself and will have no need of a "conversion" partner - i.e., the manufacturer.

The big winner in all this could be FEDEX and their acquisition of Kinkos many years ago could be a fantastic application for this.  Imagine the following the next time I want a case for my iPhone:

1. I download plans for the case I want.  I customize logos, words etc. on the case.  Perhaps I pay $1.99 for the plans for "one time use" and I get them right off the Apple store. 
2. Once completed I send them to FEDEX (like I do a document today) who routes it to the local FEDEX store (formerly Kinkos). 
3. The local FEDEX store "prints" the case for $5.00. 
4. I choose at this point whether to have FEDEX deliver it to my house through their "final mile" network or I pick it up.  

Voila!  No (or very limited raw material) inventory; customization for me specifically, made locally and ready to pick up in 1 hour.  Soon, just like we are used to "1 hour photographs" at Walgreens, we will have "1 hour manufacturing" and FEDEX may be in the best spot for this.  

(Note:  I have never seen anything saying FEDEX is planning this but I just think it makes sense.  In this very in depth and good article from 2011 entitled "3D Printing: The Future is Here" the author says "imagine a time when 3D manufacturers are as common as Kinkos offices completely ignoring the idea that for a lot of items Kinkos / Fedex office could be the manufacturer. ). 

A Fascinating Discussion of "Vehicle Miles Traveled" (VMT), Implications for the Auto Industry and Implications for Automotive Logistics

It is so interesting that the human mind almost always takes previous history and subconsciously projects it out into the future.  It is a real danger when conducting business analysis.  For example, I have always said to those who say GDP is the best indicator concerning transportation volumes that they should not assume a 1% move in GDP 20 years ago is the same as today.  Why? It is because the make up of GDP is not nearly as "freight intensive" now as it was 20 years ago.  Finance, services, health care etc make up a lot more of the GDP now than does industrial production which is the real mover of freight volumes. 

In reading this article concerning Vehicle Miles Traveled - VMT (for automobiles) I am fascinated by the same type of scenario.  We all think that auto sales will move in roughly the same proportions as it has in the past with GDP.  However, what we really need to be looking at is whether driving behaviors are remaining constant.  Once could easily envision an economy growing dramatically yet VMT actually going down which would put a damper or even downward pressure on automobile sales relative to the economy in general.  Here are some key factors:

• Movement to cities - Less number of miles traveled as people walk and/or use public transportation.
• Smaller households - As families shrink the need for the infamous "third and fourth car" shrinks as well. 
• Move to "shared" transportation  - A fascinating development is the growth of people "crowdsourcing" and borrowing each other's items.  A car stays still for a vast majority of the time it is owned and as people share their assets more, less cars get purchased. 

And, the chart below shows some of this happening:

In the end, it is very possible we could have a growing and robust economy yet have far fewer automobiles on the road.  This, of course, has big implications for transportation in the long run because automotive manufacturing consumes a lot of truck and intermodal transportation miles. 

This will clearly not happen overnight and you may say it won't happen in your working lifetime however there is a good chance it will happen and is already started to happen. One thing I have learned about these types of trends (call them "Mega-trends") is they aren't noticed until it is too late and they generally go a lot faster than you expect. 

Buyer Beware... of Anchoring!

Sitting tonight watching the news and the topic was the "after Christmas sales".  The story, of course, made me think of transportation but let me digress and tell you what I saw.

The reporter interviewed a young lady at a Chicago mall who was just thrilled with her new purchase.  I paraphrase and here is how the conversation went:

Girl: "I went into a store and the boots were 'regular $900'. I got 50% off, then I got xx% for something I did, then another xx% for opening a credit card... " (you get the idea) "I got a $900 pair of boots for $125!"

Reporter:  "Wow, you did great.  You must be real happy"

Girl: {giggling}: "Yes, I am a very happy girl"

Of course, somewhere there is a merchandiser who popped the champagne bottle and wasn't just giggling but was laughing out loud.  They had anchored the girl and anchored her good.

What never crossed the girl's mind, nor the reporter's mind apparently, is the fact that the boots may have only been worth $5.00.  How do they know?  Why was $125 a "deal?  The answer is simply that they have no idea whether it was a deal or not except in the relative terms to the "retail" price of $900.  The retailer and their all powerful merchandisers had anchored the discussion.  The consumer, the girl in this case, was set up by the merchandiser because they were able to get her to reference her thoughts around the $900.  Anything less than that was a "deal" and certainly $125 was a "steal".

It never occurred to her that the boots were probably made in a factory in Vietnam and cost the company selling them about $5.00 to make.

How does this relate to transportation you ask?  I say: beware of industry "anchoring".   It is that time of year now when the transportation industry executives and the so called "independent" analysts will come out with predictions on what will happen with rates for next year.  They will say "be ready for capacity crunches" and "be ready for at least 5% increases" and they are doing nothing more than, as an industry, anchoring, as a group,  the entire transportation buying community.  By establishing these expectations as "the truth" and giving buyers reasonable cover with what appears to be scholarly articles to reference, the industry establishes "greater than 5%" as the anchor.  Anything less than that appears to be a "deal" and occurs due to the great procurement skill of a buyer somewhere.

I can see the conversations in board rooms now:

Executive: "Mrs. Logistician,  how did you do this year"?

Mrs. Logistician: "Great!  The industry was going to go up over 5% and we were able to hold the increases at our company to 3%"

Executive: " That is great Mrs. Logistician.  You beat the market!  Fantastic!

Mrs. Logistician gets a great bonus and off she goes to Maui for vacation..

Or.. the conversation could end with the Executive asking this:

Executive: "Mrs. Logistician.  How do you know 5% is the right expectation?  The macro economic conditions don't seem to warrant it and with the changes in freight, the lower freight demand, and the fact that we are a very large shipper lead me to believe that you should have actually experienced a rate decrease this year. Shouldn't you have?"

Mrs. Logistician: Gulp!  She wonders if she will ever get to go to Maui!

What the executive did not do is she did not fall for the industry anchoring.  The executive built her expectations from the ground up.  She ignored the arbitrary industry expectation of 5% and started at 0 and then applied good macro and micro economic analysis to build her own expectation.  And, her own was far lower than where the industry tried to anchor her.

The critical lesson here for both the girl buying the boots and the transportation procurement professional is do not fall for anchoring.  Do not allow the industry to set the expectation.  Ignore these predictions and build, from the ground up, what the status and situation is for your own company, your own freight with its own characteristics  what your current pricing situation is etc. etc.  From that you should be able to develop what a very good expectation is for this year, for your situation and many of you will find it is dramatically below what where the industry will try to anchor you.

Holiday Sales Disappoint - Leading to Inventory Issues?

First, Merry Christmas and my wishes for a very happy holiday season.  Regardless of what you celebrate at this time of the year the messages all are the same: Happiness to all of you and your families!

Unfortunately, it was not a happy retailing holiday season.  As ABC and others are reporting, holiday sales have disappointed and have actually had the lowest year over year increase since 2008.  That is a haunting statistic yet not one my readers would be surprised about.  The impact on transportation can be summed up in two words: Excess Inventory.

Normally, after the holiday season the transportation industry prays for an "inventory restocking" cycle. However given the dismal sales, and the fact inventories were already elevated (as measured by the inventory to sales ratio), my estimation is the restocking cycle will not even be noticeable.   Transportation rates will remain somewhat depressed and my predictions of the transportation industry continue to hold:  

1. Rates are somewhat elevated (relative to the true capacity and demand picture) and the buyer who holds their ground should be able to negotiate good contracted rates.
2. The buyer needs not "fear" the capacity issue (which has been discussed since about 1980) until deep into 2013 at the earliest. 
3. Great rates favor those who do their homework, understand these macro trends, and are prepared to discuss them at "the table".

Going into last year, FTR predicted a potential for a 10% increase in rates which was very far off the mark.  I saw some "panic buying" (i.e, shippers accepting large increases using this prediction as justification). Going into this year we continue to hear "this is the year of the capacity crunch" and while shipping conditions are "benign", "shippers can expect to see increases in 2013" (again, have heard that since 1980).  However, the macro economic data, along with the data around the digitization and miniaturization of products, leads me to believe demand is being pulled faster than capacity and shipping conditions will favor the shipper for the vast majority of 2013.

Update 12/26/2012 10:15AM: More reports of slow holiday sales: "This Was Definitely Not A Merry Christmas for Retail" - Business Insider

Why Transportation Stocks Are So Important

In my last post I reported (and linked) to an article about transportation stocks and what the "warnings" mean which have been issued recently.  The graph below from the Wall Street Journal and this article really define why it is so important and why we need to follow these stocks not just because we are logisticians but because we follow the economy in general.

Graph from Wall Street Jounal

Macroeconomic Monday® - Mixed Results Last Week

Last week could have been a "Seinfeld" week where it was the week about nothing.  It was a very bad week (worst since June) for the stock market as people continue to anticipate poor earnings and forecasts for even slower earnings.  It then had some nuggets of macroeconomic data which essentially said things were "flat".

I do want to start with the Producer Price Index.  The PPI went up by 1.1% ("Core" PPI held flat) v. an expected value of .7%.  As can be seen in the graph below, this is a bounce back from the beginning of a decline.  It is difficult to see how a recession could be in the near future when there is such inflation at the PPI (unless you think the increase is due to speculators hoarding commodities:

FRED® PPI Index

This will be an interesting trend to watch to see if we continue to have inflationary pressure at the PPI level which ultimately will need to come into the CPI or will be a drag on corporate earnings.

Inventory to Sales Ratio:

The vaulted inventory to sales ratio was released on Monday October 15 so I thought I would include it in this week's report.  First, why is this number so important?  What it shows is whether companies are building inventory or are they lowering inventory.  If they are building inventory it is a signal that the economy is slowing since it usually takes a few months for companies to adjust to lower sales.  There is seasonality to these numbers and for sure they are not adjusted for prices (if prices go up the value  of the inventory goes up but the quantity does not) but it is still a great indicator to watch.

FRED® Inventory to Sales Ratio

The graph shows this has increased over the last few months and it had started coming down but this month it actually increased ever so slightly.  This is a clear indication the economy is "tilting" to slowing down and inventory is building.  What do companies do when inventory starts building?  They lay people off, slow down factories and slow down 2d and 3d tier purchases.

This is a key metric to follow and if you are not sure why just look at what happened during the recession - it ballooned.

Jobless  Claims:

Initial jobless claims came in lower than expected (339K v. 370k expected) however I am going to let these numbers "mature" before I make any conclusions.  There has been a lot of "noise" in these numbers lately so I am going to see some trends.  By the way, I do not subscribe to the conspiracy theories related to these numbers but rather understand there are real statistical reasons why the numbers are moving around.  Let's see how it develops in the next few weeks.

Transportation Data:

In the last couple of weeks many indices have shown the transportation freight is slowing dramatically and rates have not only stabilized but in some cases are showing year over year declines.  Transportation executives have "warned" already about slowing freight volumes and the inventory to sales ratio reported above would support the decrease in freight volumes in the future.  All in all the story is not great for the near future for freight volumes.  This report from Reuters a few weeks ago titled Dow Transports Raise Warning Flag For US Economy says it best:

"Transportation and logistics companies are also worried. At least seven of them - FedEx, Norfolk Southern, UTi Worldwide (UTIW.O), Swift Transportation Co (SWFT.N), Arkansas Best Corp (ABFS.O), XPO Logistics Inc (XPO.N) and Werner Enterprises Inc (WERN.O) have scaled back their profit forecasts in recent weeks. United Parcel Service Inc (UPS.N) led the pack when it cut its outlook in July."  

Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and others who follow the transportation industry clearly are indicating a slowing transportation spend and all the macroeconomic data would support that theory.

Advantage:

Clearly the data is showing a continued advantage for the shipper.  This is another week of Slight Advantage: Shipper®.  Last week also reported this measurement so it is clear the extreme tightening of capacity and drivers and its effects on rates is being offset by the slowing economy and the potential for a slowing economy (yes, the negative feedback loop actually will effect this even more).

September CASS Freight Index - Year over Year Decline

I will take a day to digest these numbers however the CASS Index is out for September and the results are mixed.  Increase month over month is attributed to a bump in activity to avoid a potential longshoreman's strike and even with that the Year over Year numbers for shipments has declined.

Another tidbit in the report is the feeling that inventory levels are elevated and the retailers are sitting on a lot of product which supports my assertion in my last post Macroeconomic Monday® that the sales to inventory levels will go down and will continue to show advantage to the shipper for freight rates and bidding.  (Of course, in reality, it advantages no one as lower sales to inventory means sales are down and the shipper's business is less healthy - I use these terms only in relation to the carrier - shipper relationship).

More to follow after I look at this in more depth.

Source: CASS FREIGHT SYSTEMS

Bid More Frequently, Not Less

I am not sure how I totally missed this great article in DC Velocity entitled "Go Short" however I am glad I ran into it now.  I think it is spot on and a great contrarian view from today's prevailing wisdom which is you need to be a "partner" in times of tight capacity.  Partner generally is a euphemism for a trucking sales person asking you to give them above market rates to secure some nebulous and not guaranteed insurance policy for capacity in the future.

As this article rightfully points out, this guarantee is anything but that and generally will not stand even after you paid that insurance policy cost.  The article states:

"At the heart of the study's findings is a fact that most who ship and haul for a living already know: that no truckload contract, regardless of duration, can force a shipper to honor a volume commitment, or a carrier to honor a capacity commitment. Because trucking is considered "derived demand"—meaning supply doesn't react unless demands are put on it—a carrier can easily change capacity, and the rate it charges, if it doesn't secure enough high-yield freight on a lane and finds better opportunities elsewhere. In many cases, it will stop accepting freight on a lane altogether."

As prices in the market change and as your rates become "stale" the carrier can just stop accepting tenders. They will say to you their "network has changed" and they can no longer support this lane.  It happens all the time and it happens with the best and most ethical carriers.  I am not accusing them of malpractice but rather I am just accepting what is and this article articulates it well.

This article advocates going shorter on your bid cycle, perhaps one year, and ensuring rates and lanes do not "get stale".  Interestingly enough, despite all the discussion from the carrier base about "long term partnerships" this appears to be in their best interest as well.

It is important to outline another extreme which is highlighted in the article.  Grough Grubbs, SVP of Distribution and Logistics for Stage Stores says:

"Our rating is dynamic based on competitive bidding, rather than an annual volume bid. This removes the dilemma of 'stale' bids," said Gough Grubbs, Stage's senior vice president, distribution/logistics. "As more competitive bids come in for certain lanes, incumbent carriers are given the opportunity to revise their rates in our system if they choose to. If not, they drop down in the pecking order for future loads."

This certainly looks and feels like every day is a new day and the bid cycle essentially never stops.  While this ensures market prices every day you would need to identify the trade off of this strategy with the benefits of some sort of stability.  That trade off equation would be different for each company and you would have to look at it in the context of your own competitive environment.  

One of the concerns I have written about many times is the fear the coordinated industry effort to "scare" shippers by talking about capacity shortfalls and rising prices (a week does not go by where a CEO of a trucking company feels a need to "remind" us that lowering capacity will result in higher prices) would result in the industry actually reinforcing to shippers that this is a commodity business.  Again, I do not believe it is a commodity however if all you talk about is the commodity behavior of the pricing scheme then you are essentially educating your customers to treat you as a commodity.

This article, and certainly Mr. Grubbs has taken it to the fullest measure.

 

Cass August Index is Out - What Shall We Learn?

The Cass Freight Index is out for August and the results are not surprising for those of us who stay close to this market every day.  Both expenditures and freight volumes have decreased month over month in August signaling a dramatic slowdown and one during a time when some would expect the seasonal surge to start.  Remember the idea of seasonal surcharges?

Cass Freight Index

Year over Year and Month over Month, shipment volume has decreased 1.1%.  For expenditures, we are still up year over year by 3.8%, mostly driven off of irrational fear instilled in the market during the first quarter (the reality was there was no need for those rate increases however some bought into the fear driven by some industry leaders) but month over month the expenditures are down 1.1%.  Some other points made by the people at Cass:

• There have been two straight months of freight contraction
• This is the third time this year, freight volumes are down year over year
• Inventory levels are increasing beyond what is needed for the sales volume in the economy. 
• The report says to expect rates to stay firm - I disagree with this and I think the empirical evidence will show this not to be true. 

The report continues to say driver pay and fuel is driving higher costs for the carriers.  Of course, we know higher fuel costs are burdened on the shipper, not the carrier, due to fuel surcharges.  I also have not seen a massive increase in driver pay however we shall see if that starts creeping in.  The report says these increased costs have not made it through to the shipper in rates however the long term trend is the costs are passed on.  The average operating ratio (OR) has decreased (margin increasing) for the better part of a year now.  This means either the carriers are getting great operational efficiencies to offset these cost increases (that would be a good and competitive thing to occur) or the costs are being past through.  Impossible for the carrier costs to increase and the OR rate to decrease without one of the two above occurring.  As always, it probably is some of each.  

So, here are my thoughts for shippers:

• Despite a somewhat coordinated effort across the industry to reduce capacity it appears demand is decreasing even faster.  This is a message I have been projecting for the last 6 months and the evidence here continues to reinforce this general message. 
• If you are a shipper who was frightened into taking increases at the beginning of the year you may want to review that decision and perhaps run a bid event.  You most likely are paying out of market prices.
• The idea that Q3 and Q4 is a bad time to bid may be an idea which is dying.  Carriers should be worrying about where the volume in Q12013 will come from now and may be a bit hungry. 
• This report continues to reinforce the incredible volatility of the market and the fact every shipper needs to have a very detailed supply base management program to monitor these changes and leverage them when needed. 

For carriers I believe:

• May be time to stop a lot of the blustering and start building true relationships with your shippers to lock in shrinking volume.  Getting business out of fear is not always a good or defensible long term strategy. 
• Offer value added services to ensure you bring more than just transport to the mix.  Shippers need overall logistics and supply chain partners to make it through slow times. 
• Continue to drive exceptional efficiencies.  As an industry we need to ensure that logistics expenses as a % of GDP declines.  That is the true measure if our industry is adding value or not.  Let's focus on the right things. 
• Continue to drive hard for increased fuel mileage and sustainability objectives.  This benefits everyone. 

In conclusion, the signal this report is sending is things are slowing down and the pace may be accelerating.  Get ready for a tough Q42012 and Q12013.

I wish I had better news. 

Packaging and Merchandising Vs. Logistics Efficiency?

Conducting what I call a "walk around" (my wife calls it shopping) in the grocery store this weekend started my mind wandering to ideas about packaging and shelf space.  Why would a logistician be thinking of these stereotypical marketing and merchandising topics you may ask?  The answer is simple:  There is a battle going on in the retail world within companies and it is the battle of the logistician versus the merchandiser.

Just look at the picture below:

A merchandiser probably sees nice colors to attract the shopper's eyes, good shelf space display, multiple rows of the product to dominate the shopper etc.  A logistician sees boxes which are too big for the product which is in them thereby reducing useful cube in a trailer. If you look to the far end of the aisle you will see round and curvy shaped bottles.  The logistician thinks these attract the eye but kill you on cube (both primary and secondary) utilization.  So, the question is who wins?  To this point in my career the merchandiser has won but that is changing with three key changes in the external environment.

First, transportation costs have become so high people are no longer just deferring to the merchandiser.  They really need to make a solid business case why that curvy bottle which kills cube utilization is going to drive sales.  Otherwise, we will move to optimizing cube.

Second, shelf space is no longer such a driver of consumer preference.  When the entire concept of shelf space importance was developed it was the way to advertise to an uneducated consumer.  The consumer "learned" about your product by having the product catch her eye then have her read the box (another more practical reason why boxes are so big - need real estate for the writing and graphics) and this would be a major driver of her buying decision (The old adage there are two moments of truth: One when she decides to buy the product and two when she uses the product for the first time).  However this has all changed.  Many come to the store already knowing what they will buy as they have researched it prior to arriving. Or, if they have not, rather than read the box they will whip out their smartphone and read about it on line (the smart merchandiser will have a QR code on the box so it can be scanned).  This is a mega trend for how people shop which is growing and not shrinking.  The advent of the smart phone means you no longer have a self contained space to barrage the consumer with colors and splash - the consumer can "virtually" leave your space, find the information they want and need, then reenter your space without you even knowing it.

Third, as stores become smaller (especially if you follow the mega trend of consumers moving back to the cities which changes the entire dynamic of retailing) shelf space is shrinking.  With shelf space shrinking you need to figure out how to get your product in front of the consumer, get it to be interesting AND make it small and compact (The tyranny of the "OR" - Good to Great, Jim Collins).  For example, if you make laundry detergent and you only get 1' across on a shelf.  You can take that up with two giant bottles of non-concentrated detergent or you can concentrate it immensely and get 6-8 bottles across.  I personally believe more is better and the the signal the consumer will get is if there is that many on the shelf it must be because people are buying it - perhaps I should try it.   This trend supports and is in harmony with the needs of the logistician.

So, what does this mean for the logistician?  It means you need to get upstream in the packaging design, merchandising and manufacturing of your product.  Get involved in these decisions on the front end and influence the decisions which will meet the needs of the marketer and merchandiser and will also play nicely with cube utilization and transportation costs.  The lowest cost transportation is the transportation you do not use and better cube and better secondary cube (a topic I will address in another post) drives the elimination (not just reduction) of transportation cost.  This means you need to be intimately involved in the Sales and Operations Planning (S&OP) process and if your company does not have one you should lead and develop one.

I have always said the great logistician spends as much time on these topics as they do on working with carriers.  The work with carriers tends to be fun part however this is where the majority of your cost savings will come.