No good news

According to this article in The Wall Street Journal, " Shipping companies are considered a barometer of economic health, which makes the current downturn particularly worrisome."

Other depressing comments from this article:

regarding trucking,

"In part because of high fuel prices, 1,905 trucking companies ceased operations during the first half of the year, according to Donald Broughton, a research analyst at Nashville, Tenn.-based investment bank Avondale Partners. By the end of 2008, as many as an additional 2,000 of the more than 200,000 for-hire trucking concerns in the U.S. are expected to fail, he says. Gainey Corp., a Grand Rapids, Mich., carrier with 2,200 trucks and more than $400 million in annual revenue, sought bankruptcy-court protection last week."

liner shipping,

"Ocean transport is also under pressure. The number of shipping containers entering the U.S. through its top 10 container ports between January and September was 7.2% lower than it was during the year-earlier period, according to Paul Bingham, managing director of HIS Global Insights, which tracks port data. Such containers typically carry consumer goods ranging from apparel to electronics."

and rail

"Union Pacific Corp., the largest railroad in the U.S., said Thursday that fourth-quarter freight volumes will slide about 5%. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. said third-quarter volume had slipped 1.5%. The nation's top four railroads -- Union Pacific, Burlington Northern, Norfolk Southern Corp., and CSX Corp. -- all reported third-quarter drops in volumes from last year. "It's going to be a tough year in 2009" for the economy, said James Young, chief executive of Union Pacific. "Consumers have pulled back even more, and we're going to manage the company accordingly."

Proposed new West Coast Mexican Port

There was an interesting article in the American Shipper last week about a new port planned for Punta Colonet on the Pacific Coast of Mexico. This could be a really big deal considering the costs of discharging containers in the U.S. with Union Labor is probably 3 -5 times more than what can be done in Mexico, not to mention the new restrictions being imposed on the carriers with air quality emissions etc.

The article talks mainly about how it will compete with the Southern California ports as of course most of the cargo discharged in Southern California does not stay there. The big sticking point is getting the rail connections from Mexico to other points in the U.S.


"Regardless of who wins the contracts, any potential bidder will have to negotiate with U.S. rail giants Union Pacific or BNSF, which control the mainline tracks running through the U.S. Southwest. UP had originally been a potential bidder, but pulled out of a proposed partnership with Hutchison last May. On breaking the Hutchison partnership, UP indicated it was still open to bidding with another partner on the Colonet project. U.S. West Coast ports handle more than 60 percent of the Asia-to-Atlantic Coast cargo, with the all-water route through the Panama Canal capturing another 38 percent. Last year, the Canadian port of Prince Rupert also began operations, offering a direct rail connection for cargo from the Canadian Pacific Coast to Chicago in about 100 hours. In addition, the Panama Canal, set to open a new set of larger locks in 2014, expects to capture up to half of the Asia-to-Atlantic Coast traffic by 2025. "

This last comment got me to thinking. Would it be possible for Mexico to build a railroad across THEIR country, to compete with the Panama Canal?

I wonder if "Field of Dreams" was translated into Spanish.