All the big players definitely have spend years and millions (hundreds of millions) optimizing these things. But they are optimizing DOS-based systems built in the 80s. The tech stack that the old guard is working with is unbelievable.
If Amazon is serious about being an ocean carrier, they would be the first major new competitor to enter this space since before the invention of the internet. All the competition is still mired in 80s technology.
But the technology issue aside, my point was really that Amazon has a more aggressive growth strategy and "become a monopoly" mentality than any incumbent player in this field and would be willing to take a loss in order to take market share. I believe they also have a small army of operations science PhDs who understand logistics network optimization better than anyone else in the field, and they also invest heavily in automation and robotics. They have self-driving forklifts as well as automated systems that feed instructions into the earpieces of their warehouse workers now. If they apply this strategy toward freight forwarding, that industry is going to be shaken up in a big way.
Whats wrong with it, in this case? Even if maintenance costs go up, its still cheaper to maintain than to build a new system, especially if the old system fulfills all the requirements and is proven.
When these companies want to get their business off of a legacy system, they essentially have three practical choices: 1. SAP 2. Oracle 3. A bespoke system coded in Java or .NET.
Modern customers want real-time data and analysis. They want all of their information available on the web, mobile, sms, email, API. They want a modern technology experience.
A DOS program consuming data via EDI and Excel-based input is a good candidate for the worst technology to do these types of things.
I think most customer just want to know when their stuff is going to arrive - they don't need 'real-time data and analysis' (or if they do, they don't expect the guy moving the cargo to provide it for them).
Also, those DOS\cobol systems already made shipping so cheap you can get a 40 foot container (full of stuff) from China to LA for $1300.
They can't scale? They currently handle the whole world's shipping needs. That sounds like it scaled just fine.
You wouldn't, but freight forwarders typically don't move bulk cargo, they move containerized cargo. Bulk means the entire vessel hull is loaded with one raw materials commodity, like grains or minerals.
Companies importing finished goods absolutely do want instant, automated status updates on where their goods are at, because that information helps them load-balance their supply chain to keep their warehouses and stores stocked at the right levels and evaluate the performance of their contracted manufacturers and logistics service providers. Supply chain managers absolutely want scorecards and dashboards and push status updates.