Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 514 posts

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#421

Post by eecc »

SteveGerencser wrote: post #341
bobthepanda wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my understanding is that not all containers pay the same (since they are different weights, have different destinations, etc.) and so this mostly screws over the driver who loses the ability to select the best offer.

Not only do containers not pay the same, but containers to the same location often don't pay the same. So many variables and often the driver is the one that ends up getting screwed in the process. I completely understand why so many simply refuse certain loads. And getting assigned a load you know nothing about before it's on your truck is a no go for most drivers.

Isn’t that a market failure?

I mean the rhetoric of free unregulated market is that the “homo economicus” would use total information and make fully conscious decisions.

Seems like some are withholding information to push other actors to make bad deals, externalize losses and generally speaking skirt from supply/demand dynamics.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#422

Post by rdeboo »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #417
potiuper wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each of the yards have unique constraints. Hopefully, the 2 to 4 increase is to be some sort of test such that the ability to stack 6/9 high is still within reason given it as the limit of the higher end stackers. Additionally, these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSn-dT4EMcM do not require welding to transform; are quoted with the same strength, a quarter of the original size, and 20% more expensive in early 2017.

Okay, but fancy collapsible containers does nothing to solve the problem with all the containers piling up right now. That's a longer term solution at best.

It's definitely a long term thing. Some guys from my university founded a company around foldable containers in 2008 (https://4foldcontainers.com/). It's still not common.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#423

Post by eecc »

jerry1979 wrote: post #176
aerosmile wrote: post #72

Everyone's focused on Ryan's comments about stacking, and the subsequent win there. Amazing job, Ryan, and thank you Robert Garcia for being a man to take one on the chin (for this solution not coming from your team) and for then doing the right thing. I am seriously impressed by not seeing any NIH (not invented here) behavior here. But why stop there? Ryan suggested 5 courses of actions, and made it clear that we ne…

For those who didn't see the 5 points, I've copied them below from here https://twitter.com/typesfast/status/1451543776992845834 1) Executive order effective immediately over riding the zoning rules in Long Beach and Los Angeles to allow truck yards to store empty containers up to six high instead of the current limit of 2. Make it temporary for ~120 days. This will free up tens of thousands of chassis that right now…

Funny how free-market, small-government, deregulation, rhetoric flies out of the window when own profit maximization short-terminism falls apart and everyone starts invoking centrally coordinated state intervention.

I wonder if some governmental bureau tasked with coordinating this market hasn’t been shuttered in the last couple years to some lobbyist great success…

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#424

Post by unethical_ban »

jayd16 wrote: post #60
poorjohnmacafee wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is is depressing, that clear and obvious solutions were missing at economy-critical supply chain infra. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. But also it's 2021 where people are the most cynical we've ever been, it's almost like there's interest groups in the US that want a fanning of inflation or delayed recovery through shortages.

What's clear and obvious about temporarily suspending rules that were presumably in place for a reason? Seems more like a non-obvius value call was made.

It's clear and obvious that in a crisis, one questions all of the possible causes of the problems, and evaluates all possible solutions available.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#425

Post by eecc »

Seems like all these tweets are about emptying ports so they - and the author’s startup - can go back to their business.

The rest of the systems’ profits and sustainability seem to be secondary.

Perhaps it might make sense to ponder if this super-lean truck-centric infrastructure wasn’t running too close to its breaking point?

Might be a good idea for big-gov to lend a hand but also impose some top-down decisions like: long term you will be rebasing your logistics onto a railroad based backbone.

There, and you’ve magically created a couple thousands well paying jobs in infrastructure build and maintenance…

Also call some operations researcher to copypaste a couple tiered caching algorithms onto this mess.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#426

Post by IanCal »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #415
IAmGraydon wrote: post #260

I love how these commenters think they know something about shipping that the CEO of Flexport doesn’t (I’m referring to the person you replied to, BTW).

True. But let's also note that being CEO of a company in the industry doesn't automatically make you right, nor does it mean that when you speak to a reporter or send out a tweet thread like this you don't have some sort of agenda. There's almost always an agenda. Maybe that agenda is honest and in line with public interest, maybe it isn't. And twitter is less reliable than a news story, because usually reporters see…

> The core issue is not too many containers. It's not enough truckers picking up the new containers,

This doesn't make sense to me unless the truckers are currently extremely busy. And if they are, why is there now a problem? Are there suddenly far fewer truckers?

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#427

Post by antoinebalaine »

eecc wrote: post #425

Seems like all these tweets are about emptying ports so they - and the author’s startup - can go back to their business. The rest of the systems’ profits and sustainability seem to be secondary. Perhaps it might make sense to ponder if this super-lean truck-centric infrastructure wasn’t running too close to its breaking point? Might be a good idea for big-gov to lend a hand but also impose some top-down decisions lik…

This. This right here is the voice of common sense. With fossil fuel-supply contracting in the coming decades and over-spread cities' infrastructures being impossible to navigate without transportation, the US will have no choice but to turn to rail. It's just a matter of "when", not "if".

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#428

Post by ehnto »

hbworn77 wrote: post #276
IAmGraydon wrote: post #260

I love how these commenters think they know something about shipping that the CEO of Flexport doesn’t (I’m referring to the person you replied to, BTW).

Most of them are usually the top comment on a thread like this, too, because there are a large number of people who consider them authoritative (or like what they say, or dogpile, or who knows). When it’s my industry being discussed here, I can usually predict who will be in the top spot (it’s only a few), and how wrong they’ll be. It’s a real problem but it’s also the immediate amnesia thing whoever-that-was talked…

> but it’s also the immediate amnesia thing whoever-that-was talked about.

That gave me a chuckle.

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#429

Post by singularity2001 »

rossjudson wrote: post #399
ilwu_member wrote: post #275

I am a member of ILWU 13. A couple thoughts after reading the comments: The zoning change is for TEU storage outside the port. The port itself was not subject to that rule. The Port of Los Angeles is a landlord and is not directly involved in operations. Private companies, such as APM, EverPort, and others, rent piers/berths and are responsible for the actual operations and logistics. Some speculation: recently I’ve…

Seems like more of a tragedy of the commons, with each ship (A) assuming it's fine to leave empty because some other ship (B) will grab the empty containers. That's all well and good until (A) comes back, and then it sits there waiting like everyone else. Going back empty works once . Or more times if you're headed to a different market, I suppose.

I thought the price for containers had more than quadrupled. How can leaving them behind be economic?

Re: Long Beach has temporarily suspended container stacking limitations

#430

Post by cube00 »

icelancer wrote: post #244
aerosmile wrote: post #72

Everyone's focused on Ryan's comments about stacking, and the subsequent win there. Amazing job, Ryan, and thank you Robert Garcia for being a man to take one on the chin (for this solution not coming from your team) and for then doing the right thing. I am seriously impressed by not seeing any NIH (not invented here) behavior here. But why stop there? Ryan suggested 5 courses of actions, and made it clear that we ne…

I am no defender of government bureaucracy, but the fact we got the stacking rules changed in 48 hours is pretty crazy. I suspect more changes will come, but it may take some time. I'd let it play out over 1-2 weeks and re-evaluate. Can't believe I am giving government delays a pass here... but I try not to look a gift horse in the mouth when we get near-immediate action from people who aren't known for solving probl…

The pandemic has shown the bureaucracy can move quickly when they want to. Although I'd argue the politicians share some of the blame for slow legislation when they want to avoid something. It's not always the behind the scenes bureaucrats that are the bottle neck.
Post reply on HN