Asia Technology Summit examines ocean cargo supply chain transparency

Global supply chain managers seeking more ocean cargo rate transparency may have heard some encouraging news at the rencently-concluded Asia Technology Summit in Singapore.

The annual event is hosted by INTTRA, a leading ocean shipping network, software and information provider which was acquired by E2Open last month.

The timing for such a conference could not have been better, say industry analysts, as transpacific rates have been volatile and unsteady during the peak season for a variety of reasons related to carrier consolidation and pending trade conflicts.

At the Summit, INTTRA announced the launch of its INTTRA Rates pilot, the planned expansion of Avantidainto North America, and the results of an industry survey highlighting top strategic issues.

Eleven freight forwarders participated in the pilot, said spokesmen. The participants represent a broad section of the market, covering small, medium and large freight forwarders. INTTRA intends to launch a fully digitalized rates solution in the first half of 2019 based on the results of the pilot.

“The current system for managing rates and rate changes is inefficient and error prone, leading to errors in 30-45% of all freight invoices due to the manual nature of today’s rate management processes,” said spokesmen. “A digital solution will address this issue.”

Avantida, which recently launched in Mexico, has plans to launch in the United States by the end of the year. Avantida continued to grow in 2018 with 43% more registered users compared to the same period in 2017. In addition to the US, Avantida plans to expand to Scandinavia and Canada in the coming months.

Transactions have also enjoyed substantial growth, more specifically in the area of depot services increasing by 61% and triangulation services by 62% in 2018 so far.

As reported in SCMR, a variety of digitized information-sharing initiatives have been launched by ocean carrier consortia and IT providers this past year to achieve many of the same “transparency” objectives.