Author Topic: London Gateway  (Read 13207 times)

Offline alanp

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
London Gateway
« on: January 24, 2014, 07:27:35 PM »
Hamburg Sud have announced today they are moving from Tilbury to London Gateway in May.

Offline palbertini

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2014, 12:57:05 PM »

Offline Michael

  • Just can't stay away
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2014, 05:49:02 PM »
It's going to get very difficult for the larger container companies to justify sailing past LGW to Tilbury in the near future, which kind of mocks recent political blurb that insisted that LGW would generate new traffic, thus far it hasn't, it's only collect existing traffic at the loss to other ports.

It'd be no suprise if Hamburg Sud left Felixstowe in the future to consolidate services at LGW.

Offline Alan Green

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2014, 08:48:10 PM »
Its ironic that one of the big selling points of London Gateway is its close proximity to London (digging at Felixstowe) yet the services that it has attracted are from a port even closer to London !

Offline palbertini

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2014, 03:49:54 PM »
With 20-20 hindsight, the decision by Forth Ports to acquire 100% control of Tilbury Container Services and buy out DP World

Offline Neil D

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2014, 04:37:22 PM »
It is a simple fact that new ports don't generate new import-export container traffic. The UK market is what it is, with its overall size driven by macro economic factors, and so yes, London Gateway has to win market share from other UK ports.

The list of where to win it from is a very short one: Felixstowe, Southampton and Tilbury (with Thamesport already out of the deep sea business now). DP World is the majority shareholder at Southampton Container Terminal and so may be less inclined to try and take business from there, and its sale of its shareholding at Tilbury Container Services certainly meant that there would be no qualms in taking business from Tilbury.

However, the north-south trades served by the likes of SAECS and Hamburg Sud are actually quite small in volume terms. SAECS and Hamburg Sud together are probably no more than 150-200,000 teu p.a. but London Gateway's first phase capacity is 1.6 million teu p.a. - so they have to win some of the big volume Far East customers - and these are at Felixstowe and Southampton.

Offline Andrew McAlpine

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,572
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2014, 09:44:50 PM »
From what I hear though LGW had been trying to get the Hamburg Sud business for a while and offered very cheap rates to entice them to move.
They were unsuccessful in getting COSCO to move from Felixstowe which was apparently only due to Hutchinson stepping in at the last minute and putting pressure on the Chinese line.

However be under no illusion that any port is fair game, despite Southampton being part owned by DPWorld they have also approached customers that use DPW Southampton offering very low rates, so the gloves are definately with LGW doing all they can to gain trade.

My personal view is that UASC & CSCL will be big targets for LGW as they are due to cooperate on Europe-Far East services shortly with 19,000TEU vessels. Currently UASC vessel share with CMACGM/MSC through Southampton but this will end when P3 starts while CSCL currently use Felixstowe.

Watch this space...............



  

Offline Michael

  • Just can't stay away
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2014, 11:10:29 PM »
The P3 service is a big winner for those who can collect it, currently it's eight services to the UK, five at Felixstowe and three at Southampton, word is that's where they will stay for the foreseeable future, but both Ports may loose other services to ensure prime slots at the quay for P3. No one really knows what will shake out when the merry go round stops.

I can also confirm LGW have been seriously shaking the Southampton tree, being owned by the same parent company means little in this tug of war for custom. Like Tilbury, Southampton is 'part' owned and wild guesses are that if they can secure some of that traffic to LGW they may pull out of Southampton and consolidate at LGW which will be wholly owned.

Felixstowe have done a lot of PR recently with COSCO and CSCL, the Chinese being Chinese would obviously prefer to line there own pockets rather than the middle east, but business is business and will clearly go where the rates are cheapest.

Evergreen are feeling left in the wilderness and may team up with someone or possibly join the CKYH alliance, interesting times ahead.

Offline Neil D

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2014, 10:16:36 AM »
I agree re Southampton. SCT is a 51% stake in a leased terminal (with a finite time length) for DPW whereas London Gateway is 100% ownership of a freehold terminal (with a huge logistics park too). If push comes to shove, London Gateway is naturally DPW's preference over Southampton. But if they can win business from Felixstowe rather than Southampton, of course that would be preferable for them.

What is clear though is that London Gateway wants to (and has to) win a range of services. It's no good just having Far East services. They need the full set of east-west and north-south services in order to serve cargo owners' needs. Hence why Hamburg Sud, even though it's a relatively small volume, is important.

Yes, certainly more shake outs to come in terms of the big ship services. The P3 Alliance (assuming it gets regulatory approval) appears to be going for Felixstowe and Southampton but as you say, this may well cause others to seek preferential berthing at London Gateway.

What happens with the G6, CKYH, Evergreen, CSCL and UASC over the next few months will be very interesting!

Offline Alan Green

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2014, 02:34:56 PM »
The official Hamburg Sud press release appears here:

http://www.hamburgsud-line.com/hsdg/media/hamburgsd/documents_1/regionalinformation/europe_1/news_1/Terminal_Change_Tilbury_to_London_Gateway.pdf

A quick search of the Hamburg Sud services to transfer show that 23 different vessels are involved.

Hamburg Sud also mention 6 Maersk Vessels (Lavras, Lebu, Laberinto, Leticia, Lins, and Lirquen) in their South America East Coast schedules, which Maersk market as the SAMBA service (South America Middle East. I would assume this is due to slots taken by Hamburg Sud.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2014, 03:07:08 PM by Alan Green »

Offline john

  • Just popping in
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2014, 11:09:14 PM »
looking at the amount of shipping about LGW & Felixstow have plenty of ships to go around ???

Offline Alan Green

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2014, 02:14:25 PM »
According to Containerisation International magazine:

Hamburg Sud want to introduce 9500 teu vessels onto the routes transferred to London Gateway, and Tilbury's berth restrictions, limit the size of vessels to 7,100 teu.



Offline Neil D

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2014, 11:18:19 AM »
Yes, I saw this news item too, but Tilbury has seen the Sovereign Maersk (10,500 teu) at TCS in the past (albeit a one-off call I think). So in theory the new Hamburg Sud vessels could still be accommodated at TCS, but of course at London Gateway the tidal access restrictions are significantly less.

Offline Phil English

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,492
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #13 on: February 11, 2014, 12:25:47 PM »
Tilbury berths are not governed by TEU size but by length, beam and draft restrictions. A partially-laden Sovereign Maersk did visit Northfleet Hope several years ago but Hamburg-Sud's 9,600 teu class with 14m max draft and 19 rows of containers cannot be accommodated.

Brgds
Phil

Offline Neil D

  • Not too shy to talk
  • *
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: London Gateway
« Reply #14 on: February 11, 2014, 02:33:54 PM »
Thanks Phil. Yes, the crane outreaches and alongside depth at Northfleet Hope mean that the 9,600 teu HS ships could only be accommodated if not on max draft (or only by sitting on the berth around high water which is impractical) and only if stowed a certain way. Not impossible but not preferable either when there is an alternative just down the river without these issues - you can see why the decision was made. Plus there is also the draft limitation of Diver Shoal off Gravesend isn't there.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk