I Used the Most Recent 10Ks to Create a SWOT analysis

 Using an AI tool, I had it look at the 10K's for the top 5 trucking companies and asked it to provide a SWOT analysis for the trucking industry.

NOTE: This is Generative AI:

Here are the top 5 trucking companies in the US, based on revenue in 2022:

1. UPS Inc. (NYSE: UPS)
2. FedEx Corp. (NYSE: FDX)
3. XPO Logistics (NYSE: XPO)
4. J.B. Hunt Transport Services Inc. (NASDAQ: JBHT)
5. Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc. (NYSE: KNX)

I have reviewed the 2022 10Ks of these companies and here is a SWOT analysis for this industry:

Strengths:

• Strong financial performance: These companies have all reported strong financial performance in recent years, with high revenue and profit margins.
• Large and diversified fleets: These companies have large and diversified fleets, which allows them to offer a wide range of transportation services to their customers.
• Experienced management teams: These companies have experienced management teams with a deep understanding of the trucking industry.
• Strong brand reputations: These companies have strong brand reputations, which gives them an advantage in attracting customers.

Weaknesses:

• Rising fuel prices: Rising fuel prices are a major challenge for the trucking industry, as they can eat into profits.
• Driver shortage: The trucking industry is facing a driver shortage, which is making it difficult to find qualified drivers.
• Increased regulations: The trucking industry is facing increased regulations, which can add to costs and complexity.
• Competition from other modes of transportation: The trucking industry is facing competition from other modes of transportation, such as rail and air freight.

Opportunities:

• Growth in e-commerce: The growth of e-commerce is creating new opportunities for the trucking industry, as retailers need to move goods more quickly and efficiently.
• Expansion into new markets: These companies could expand into new markets, such as international markets.
• Development of new technologies: These companies could develop new technologies to improve their operations, such as self-driving trucks.

Threats:

• Economic downturn: An economic downturn could lead to a decline in demand for trucking services.
• Technological disruption: Technological disruption, such as the development of self-driving trucks, could pose a threat to the trucking industry.
• Changes in government regulations: Changes in government regulations could impact the trucking industry.

Overall, the trucking industry is facing some challenges, but there are also some opportunities for growth. The top 5 trucking companies are well-positioned to take advantage of these opportunities and continue to grow their businesses.

I hope this helps!

Another Tough Report from A Carrier - Schneider Has Tough Q32019

The freight recession is real and the carriers are feeling the pain.  We know the smaller carriers are truly suffering however today Schneider (SNDR) reported and it does not appear to be pretty.  First, relative to expectations it was a tough quarter.  From Seeking Alpha:

1. EPS missed by .02 on Non GAAP and by .11 on a GAAP basis
2. Revenue was down 7.7% YoY and missed expectations by $40mm

A couple of key points from their press release:

1. Volumes and price were "compressed" and while they stated there was a "moderate" uplift in the seasonal volume the tone of the message was it was virtually meaningless.  We have learned this from other carriers:  There has been no meaningful "surge" period.
    
2. We knew there were shutdown costs due to the closing of the First to Final Mile business (Which opened to a lot of fanfare about 2 years ago) but I found it surprising they had to impair the value of trucks they are selling.  This tells me they are shrinking the fleet and are actually taking losses on the equipment to dispose of them.
   
3. While their truckload numbers are tough to decipher due to impacts of the FTFM closure and the impairment of tractors, both intermodal and logistics (think brokerage) suffered as well.  Intermodal was down 2% due to volumes and Logistics was down 13% (Blamed on a major customer insourcing). 
   
4. They lowered their guidance from what was $1.30 per share to $1.38 and it is now $1.24 to $1.30.  Again, this appears to be due to the tractor impairment charge.  Interestingly they lowered their CAPEX for the year which again, indicates to me they are shrinking the asset base.  

My opinion is the freight recession is even tougher than originally stated for all carriers.  While I do think there is some "kitchen sink" activity going on here (So many losses due to shutting down the FTFM that they are adding in other stuff to clean up) I think the recession is real.  

Why Are People Using The Driver "Crunch" as An Excuse for Poor Service?

Ok, no more webinars or explanations of how to be a "shipper of choice... please.  I think we all get it that there is a driver problem and there is a capacity problem.  However, as I think about this there are two real issues I just cannot reconcile with the problem.  The two are 1) Lack of delivering on commitments and 2) Lack of investment.

First, lets deal with commitments.  This word really lacks meaning in this industry but I will try to define it. The definition is simply "Do what you say you are going to do" and regardless of tight capacity or not, this is something everyone should be able to do.  Why is freight being left on docks after companies have made commitments (through tender acceptances) to pick up the freight?  If there are no drivers to pick up the freight be up front and honest with the shipper.  Tell them that.  I fear too many companies are just "sweeping up" tenders then, over time, figuring out what they will do and what they won't do (sometimes by just not delivering at all).  I cannot figure out if this is purposeful or if it is just horrible execution. 

This also brings me to the idea that we are blaming ELDs for this crisis which seems ridiculous to me.  Essentially, when someone says that, they are saying they used to operate illegally but now that there is an electronic device they can no longer be illegal. Oops.. that type of argument gets you in trouble.

So, this brings me to my second and final point:  Don't listen to what the sales people tell you, listen to what the CEO's of the companies tell the investors.  The key question you should be asking carriers when they say they need higher rates to offset the capacity crunch is what are they going to do with that money?  If they are plowing back into driver investments then I am all in.  If they are increasing dividends and or buying back stock then you have to wonder who is kidding who. 

My fear is this issue is going to be a circular problem that will never be solved.  Let's follow this logic:

1) How is leadership compensated?  Increasing stock price.

2) How do you increase stock price in a tight market with raising rates?  Buy back stock and raise dividends. 

3) Will the stock price go up as much if you invest the money in driver pay versus doing #2 above?  No. 

This says we likely will not see driver investment or productivity investment.  Rather, we likely will see shareholder investment which will make the problem much worse.

Please prove me wrong by doing the right thing. 

When Does a Comment to Investors Become an Illegal "Signal" to Competitors?

On July 18, 2015 I wrote a blog post entitled:  DOJ Investigates Airlines - Are the Trucking Companies Next?  At that time I had just read an article about the DOJ investigating the airlines concerning collusion on capacity and ticket pricing (The original article was on Bloomberg News and titled: What Does it Take to Prove Airline Collusion).  What I found interesting is they were investigating statements made during earnings calls and "investor" conferences where one airline executive might say they are going to practice things such as "disciplined capacity control" or have "expected price increases through disciplined revenue management".

The question raised by the investigation was essentially whether these were statements to investors so they could make a good investment decision or where they "signals" to the competitors?  For example, does the statement "disciplined capacity control" state a good business practice to the investors or does it state to the competition "If you don't add capacity I won't add capacity".

As part of the post, I posited this exact question could be applied to the trucking and freight transportation industry.  Every conference I have been to and every investor deck I have seen usually has the freight transportation executive using these exact words. 

The example used in the lawsuit is, according to the article:

"...airline officials repeatedly assured one another on earnings calls and at conferences that exercising "capacity discipline was good for the industry"

Sound familiar?

It is a fascinating question and it really puts the companies in a pickle.  If they do not disclose "material" items to the investors they can get sued for not disclosing but if they disclose too much they can (and are) get sued for collusion. 

Well, there is an update to the story and I think it is a big deal.  In today's NY Times it is reported: Southwest Airlines Settles Suit but Denies Colluding to Keep Ticket Prices High.  Southwest has agreed to pay $15M in cash and "provide extensive cooperation" with the on-going investigation against American Airlines, Delta Airlines and United Airlines. "Extensive Cooperation is defined as:

 "a full account of facts relevant to the plaintiff's case as well as a series of informational meetings and interviews with industry experts and Southwest employees facilitated by the company."

How could this effect trucking:

1. We all have been to the many conferences where this type of language has been used by top executives.  Could the airline case be used as a precedent for a case against transportation?
   
2.  Does SWA have something and essentially became the first one to talk - get a lighter penalty for turning?  $15M is a lot more than just "nuisance" money.  Something is going on here.
   
3. Will trucking companies start being a lot more careful at conferences and public statements as a result of this settlement?

As I said in 2015, this is definitely a case to keep an eye on and it could have broad and deep implications for the transportation industry as a whole.