We will have to see. I personally cannot see it happening. You have to remember that a modern ULCC costs about gbp20,000 per day and Liverpool adds 2 days to the circuit. Even worse EVERY container on that ship, not just the UK ones, goes on a 2 day jaunt up the Irish sea to no benefit. Add on the fact that nearly half of the UK containers on that ship will now be taken south by road, incurring extra cost. Add on the fact that southern ports will not stand idly by and watch this happen.
Yes there will be trials and it will be a very useful emergency diversion port. Of course the shipping lines will support the idea but I doubt there are any signed contracts about.
The two day "jaunt" is not necessarily a problem, because the ship is potentially earning additional revenue by sailing to Liverpool to collect more containers that otherwise would have moved to southern ports. And that is where those "hidden" costs come in to play. To briefly explain, most import containers in the UK move inland for unloading directly at the receivers premises or nominated warehouse. A relatively small percentage are unloaded in the port area and are usually returned to the quay. Taking Felixstowe which is the UK's largest port, and handles about 4 million TEU per year it probably means that a substantial percentage move "north." either by road or rail. Prices vary widely but a typical rail/road move from Felixstowe to a warehouse in Greater Manchester typically might cost a receiver anything from GBP450.00 to GBP550.00 assuming the line only charges for the single trip. However, some lines charge the full round trip cost, particularly if the receiver requests delivery by road which might be the only way a deadline delivery can be achieved. In this case the cost can easily rise by a further two or three hundred Pounds per 20 ft container. A 40ft container moving rail/road will be even more expensive. Once the container is delivered to that Greater Manchester warehouse, the line will try to match the import load with an export load, but with more containers being imported than exported full this is not always possible.so the line has to either return the empty to a nearby depot or port, or have it return to the port of entry. The alternative is to drop the empty container at a nearby depot or port, but then the line incurs lifting fees and storage so will try to manage it stocks to meet local demand. When the container in the depot is allocated to an export movement, the line will incur another lift charge and possibly an inspection fee as well as the cost of moving the container to the shippers premises and either back to the port or railhead which incurs further costs. Unfortunately, for the carrier, it's unlikely they will be able to secure the full cost of the journey south from the shipper as most carriers subsidise their export haulage costs, particularly along the M62 corridor and the West Midlands due to the local market conditions. As a result, the Carrier can easily end up picking up the cost of any southbound rail movement and even more if volume business like waste paper, plastic scrap and metal being involved. Here it is also worth remembering that these three commodities form the largest volumes to be exported from the UK and Europe generally back to Asia and that's all before we talk about empty units which have no contribution and still incur port handling costs etc. Calling at Liverpool reduces these repositioning costs and therefore for the ship owner the appeal grows, especially if can increase it's appeal across other markets such as Ireland and Scotland through the use of feeders.
That is the problem. The round the world liners make one call at best in the UK. ALL UK containers will be discharged at that one call, be it a southern port or Liverpool.
To suggest Liverpool as a second call only further weakens Liverpool's case.
I have never suggested to make Liverpool a second call, it is you who is thinking that. As we both agree, majority of Containers to/from UK to/from the East (Asia) will call once once in the UK whether Felixstowe or Southampton, and they are definitely not going to sail to Liverpool first or afterwards.
Again I emphasis that any of the ships that are on the transatlantic routes (America's) that Peel Holdings are seeking. As by coming to Liverpool rather than Southampton or sailing around to Felixstowe would ultimately save one/two days sailing and ultimately costs too especially if the goods on board are destined for the Midlands and the North including Scotland which many are anyway.
I'd agree that initially we are likely to see more new services from the west and one may not be far away, with those from the east likely to follow in the next twelve to eighteen months. As for double calls in the by these Far East services not happening, I can confirm this already does happen with 2m (Maersk and MSC) making a call on the AEI service at both Felixstowe and Southampton as below.
https://www.maerskline.com/routes/shipping-from-asia-to-europe/ae1-westbound
whilst the CMA-CGM/APL/MSC operated Epic 1 service also provides a double call at Felixstowe and Southampton as below.
http://www.cma-cgm.com/products-services/line-services/flyer/EPIC1
At the moment the UK market is distorted because the lines charge a premium charge in the freight for serving Liverpool and other Northern ports of anything between USD200.00 and USD500.00 per teu to compensate for the feedering costs and double handling at the transhipment port. Any carrier committing a direct service to Liverpool could reduce or even waive this additional cost and still come out on top assuming that they can gain critical mass, something which MSC for one have been doing over the last two years.
