SCM & Logistics Exec. calling balls and strikes in the SCM world. Tweets are my own/not those of my employer. RT's ≠ Endorsement
United States/Europe
Joined February 2016
- Tweets1.8K
- Following239
- Followers1K
- Likes658
This pretty much sums up what a visit to one of my DC’s looks like when they haven’t been following our SOPs.
Bingo!
I'm going to put my account's "logistics wizard" hat back on for a moment and teach you exactly how something like this could (realistically) happen, even if it's ultimately not the specific case here.
Buckle up...
🤫 Fun fact: there's a consortium of large U.S.-based manufacturers that does aggregated group buys for global maritime and air freight shipments. This massive volume drives rates down across all of the consortium member through cooperative scale.
There's a catch, however - no freight forwarder may bid on any of the lanes if they do not have wholly owned offices in EACH country where ANY member of the consortium could book a shipment (either to or from).
So, if a forwarder wants to be in the pool of service providers, it agrees that it must be able to theoretically service EVERY LANE for EVERY MEMBER completely in-house, without using an agent network.
That means that only massive, multinational forwarders (mostly based in Europe, excepting perhaps CH Robinson and Expeditors) fit the criteria.
🤔 What does this mean to U.S. national security?
Given that some of the manufacturers source parts from and/or sell to China, it means that any logistics provider who wants the business of any of the consortium members must have offices in China.
Thus, every freight forwarder involved has their own offices and their own internal systems inside of China, staffed by Chinese nationals.
This presents an obvious insider risk wherein a Chinese national employee of a contracted freight forwarder could theoretically poke around company systems and see the commercial shipping documents and other confidential information, even on shipments the employee isn't managing...
...Or, in this case, simply REBOOK and REDIRECT a specific shipment of goods desired by the Chinese government. One relatively small change, unnoticed until much too late by the consortium member.
Moreover, utilizing Chinese internet to carry data in/out of company systems is a whole different domain of issues for reasons obvious.
🤯 Here's why all of that matters:
Lockheed Martin controls almost all of its own global supply chain movements, including routing of subcontracted parts and components, for everything it buys, makes, and sells.
And it has long been one of the core members of that logistics consortium.
😡
This was no accident.
🚨🚨SCOOP: A shipment of F-35 fighter jet parts was rerouted to Hong Kong this summer — then vanished.
Congress and DOD are investigating, amid the possibility that China may now have access to the highly-classified program.
W/ @audrey_decker9
politico.com/news/2026/09/18…
It’s almost as if the market is voting with their feet or in this case their fuel.
I’m guessing we won’t be seeing Ryan’s name on the leaderboard anytime soon.
Flexport beats Peloton’s $33.7m FMC claim splash247.com/?p=246532 via @splash_247
1. This was theft by an organization not an individual. They already know how to move this beer.
2. Pabst is getting more media value from this loss than the beer was worth.
This is not new nor is it a record.
As someone who used to manage freight for a major brewer I can assure you this has happened many, many times before.
A truck carrying an estimated 40,000 pounds of Pabst Blue Ribbon beer was stolen in Montclair in what may be the biggest beer heist ever. The stolen truck was loaded with what is equivalent to more than 50,000 cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon. abc7ne.ws/6Fi322
So true.
Every Single Person In Country Suddenly Expert On Complex International Trade Agreements buff.ly/y2d20jT
Singapore-based Apex Logistics ‘fully cooperating’ in US probe into alleged smuggling of Nvidia chips straitstimes.com/business/sp…
The Pinkertons knew how to fix this problem….
US trainyards have become a popular hotspot for thieves, creating a $200 million problem for railroads across the country bloomberg.com/news/features/…
Supply Chain Matt retweeted
Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern tried to keep their employee impact data hidden, but the STB forced them to make it public, and now we know why.
They wanted this bit buried: over 1,100 job eliminations and 500+ forced transfers will occur if this merger gets approved. The Union Pacific CEO said workers would “benefit” from the merger...benefit them how, exactly?
So Supply Chain is no longer sexy?
