Chinese self-driving truck company Inceptio Technology announced that it has completed $100 million in equity financing. At the...

Remote Vital Signs Monitoring via Mobile https://xlera8.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/remote-vital-signs-monitoring-via-mobile.png 27th April 2020 Orion developed a real-time healthcare solution...

As I am sure every supply chain professional and logistician is doing now, I am spending quite a bit of time thinking about the overall supply chain in the United States and wondering if it is truly set up to service the Country in a time of national emergency.  We heard the Governor of NY today in his press conference say that the states are basically bidding against each other to get needed (and scarce) health care supplies.  Rather than going where they are most needed they appear to be going to the highest bidder.

We have also heard the President tell the states this is substantially a state problem and the feds are there to help and backstop.  Finally, we are hearing about the shear lack of ventilators and hospital beds when (just a few weeks ago it was "should") a pandemic hit the United States.  All of this makes me wonder if this is truly the best way to deal with a national emergency.


By now many of you have also seen the incredible Ted talk Bill Gates gave back in 2015 where he essentially predicted this COVID-19 outbreak.  While not predicting this one in particular, Mr. Gates did say something like this would happen.  I highly encourage you to watch this:


Here are some key points from the talk (March of 2015):

1. The next big crisis will be from "microbes" not "missiles".
    
2. We have insulated ourselves from huge war catastrophes (i.e. a nuclear war or another world war) because we have spent a trillion dollars plus on national defense and the infrastructure required to defend the United States.
3. We have a military which can scale up dramatically in a short time to fight or deter a war.
4. We should model our fight against microbes after the structure of the military.  You have a permanent "active" force and you have a large "reserve" force which can be called up and which actively practices, trains. and stays functional. 

When I saw him say this I was absolutely floored.  When I was in the Army in Germany we used to practice going to our "General Defensive Position (GDP)" and we would periodically go visit the warehouses set up all over Europe with stockpiles of tanks, trucks etc.  We would start them up, move them, practice deploying them etc. and we would do that in conjunction with our reserve forces.  We called it "REFORGER" which stood for "Return of Forces to Germany".  It was all a preparation for scaling up the military in Germany to over 1 million soldiers if the war started.  Similiar exercises were done in Korea and other places.

So, the question I am thinking about now is if it is time to have a "Reserve Supply Chain Force"?  This would be something you would sign up for just like the military reserves.  You would have a role / rank, you would go and practice once a month on the weekend, you would do a 2 week summer training and you would be available to be called up if the government activated the reserves.  We would have needs for coordination with civilian industry, you would run a huge reserve of trucks, trailers and drivers and you would work for a leader of this organization.

If your civilian job was in an "Essential industry or company" you may get activated but stay embedded in that company to coordinate all the work.

There are a lot of details to work out but perhaps we need this force that can work in the complex civilian world of supply chain and tie it to the needs of a pandemic so we can scale up the supply chain and distribution / logistics network very quickly.  What would this accomplish:

1. It would allow us to scale up almost instantaneously.  Get the expertise in place, get the trucks / trailers along with drivers and immediately establish the infrastructure for leadership.
2. It would prioritize the loading of the nation's supply chain after huge "air in the pipe" is created (Think the run on TP).  This could be done in conjunction with FEMA.
3. It would allow us to train so we are ready right away.  By being trained we don't take months to just figure out "how things work".
4. Finally, it would establish a professional "corps" which is qualified, ready and willing to get called up as needed. 

In the end, we have the model on how to build an infrastructure to fight a huge event which comes up on us like a black swan.  The model is the military and the reserves.  We should follow it.  Perhaps CSCMP can help with this and build out the model.  

In the internet age, technological innovation has largely been driven by a community of software engineers, web developers, and hardware hackers. Until recently,...

NYC’s Strategy To Dismantle & Replace Fossil Fuel Infrastructure By Daniel Zarrilli, Chief Climate Policy Advisor & OneNYC Director, Office of NYC Mayor Bill de...

This post was originally produced for Forbes. Download the podcast via Apple Podcasts, Google Play or Spotify. Dr. Katharine Hayhoe is a climate scientist...

Adexa solutions deploy attributes to define the characteristics of machines, processes customers and suppliers, in order to mold the solution to a particular environment.

The post Attribute-Based Planning for a Green Supply Chain appeared first on Adexa.

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.  

San Diego-based self-driving truck startup TuSimple, announced on September 17 that its Series D round had secured an...

While I personally was unable to attend the annual Freightwaves Transparency19 conference this year I did watch a lot of the clips and I was fascinated by the shear volume of "Freight-tech"(I will abbreviate FT) companies coming out of the woodwork to help shippers ship product.  We are in the "golden age" of FT launches, venture capital money and potentially IPOs.

Or, as the title stated, has Uber and Lyft killed the dream?  More on that later but first, let's remind ourselves "how business works".

An entrepreneur comes up with a great idea and tries to get it to scale with a series of private fundings.  Venture capitalists get in early, generally get seats on the board and hope for an eventual big pay day when the company is either sold or goes public.  The company is built to scale (meaning it is generating cash - hopefully - or has a path to be cash flow positive.  Then, the early owners need to take money out of the company for a variety of reasons by going public or selling. Here are the reasons they may want to extract money:

1. Family wealth planning - they generally have a lot of their wealth in the company and they need some back.  
2. Pay Employees - Many early stage company employees are paid with options and they eventually want and need that money.  This is a warning to many employees who get in too late in the game.  If your options are valued right before the IPO then a lot of the time you are under water when it goes public (as are many Uber and Lyft employees).
3. All the juice is squeezed and the VC people want out. - Venture capitalists do not hold companies and eventually they want their money back.  Once they believe they have "squeezed all the juice out of they idea they will want to exit. 

Final mile delivery: for many companies, it’s the most expensive and challenging aspect of getting goods to consumers. Referring to the last stretch of delivery — from a transportation hub or warehouse to the final destination — various logistical issues make last mile delivery a challenge. Navigating...

The post From Robots to Crowdsourcing: 6 Top Trends in Last Mile Delivery first appeared on Ottawa Logistics.

Blockchain is a radical new technology that creates a distributed ledger that is verifiable between two parties and does not require an intermediate...