In September, the cost of a one-way voyage for a Suezmax tanker carrying oil from the Black Sea to India was approximately $19 million. By early October, the transportation cost on the same route had risen to $27–30 million. These figures, reported by Reuters on October 13, indicate an increase ranging from 42% to 58% in just a few weeks.
A change of this magnitude in the cost of a single tanker voyage actually illustrates a much broader problem facing global trade today.
Production continues around the world, countries continue trading with one another, and energy and raw materials are transported to the markets where they are needed. The solutions developed by the logistics industry in response to crises also play an important role in maintaining this continuity. However, the economic cost of making all this possible is becoming increasingly burdensome.
I believe that when assessing global trade, it is no longer sufficient to look only at how much cargo is transported, how much exports have increased, or whether trade volumes have been maintained. We must also question how many additional resources we are using to sustain the same level of trade.
Because the problem we face today is not merely rising logistics costs; it is the increasing pressure on the efficiency balance of global trade.
The effects of the Russia-Ukraine war on maritime transportation in the Black Sea are nothing new. However, increasing security risks, disruptions to port operations, and uncertainties surrounding sanctions have recently made the cost structure of trade even more complex.
S&P Global's assessment dated October 9 reveals that additional premiums associated with security and sanctions risks in Black Sea tanker transportation have increased. What is particularly noteworthy here is that an attack or loss does not necessarily have to occur for these risks to have economic consequences. Even threats that have not yet materialized can affect insurance conditions, freight rates, and vessel availability.
We see a similar picture in developments concerning the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the most critical transit points for global energy trade. The Red Sea and the Suez Canal are among the main routes for container transportation between Asia and Europe. Although the effects of security problems in these regions differ, they share a common economic consequence: while trade continues thanks to alternative solutions developed by the logistics industry, new costs may also arise.
For example, redirecting part of oil exports to alternative departure points in response to reduced transit through the Strait of Hormuz is important for maintaining the continuity of energy supply. However, the ability to ship oil from an alternative port does not mean that it can be transported at the same cost.
New routes may require different infrastructure, additional land and maritime transportation, changing insurance conditions, and more complex operations.
Moreover, redirecting cargo from one corridor to another can also affect the capacity of ports, terminals, and connecting routes along the alternative corridor. As a result, a problem that initially emerges in a particular region can generate costs and delays across a much wider geographical area.
I believe there is an important distinction we need to emphasize here.
The ability of global trade to adapt to crises is not the same as its ability to maintain the same level of efficiency.
In other words, the logistics industry's creativity in developing alternative routes ensures the continuity of trade. However, this capability must now also be complemented by the ability to manage the additional costs and uncertainties that arise.
We generally assess increases in transportation costs through freight rates. Yet a significant portion of the costs companies face today is not directly visible on transportation invoices.
The most tangible example of this is uncertainty in delivery times.
According to Xeneta's September 2026 data, the global on-time arrival rate in maritime transportation fell to 27%. On the Far East–Europe route, this rate was measured at just 4%. On the same route, the average vessel delay reached 9.9 days.
We should not interpret these figures merely as vessels arriving late at ports.
A container being delivered ten days later than planned may mean a change in the production schedule for a manufacturer, the need to hold additional inventory for an importer, or a risk to the delivery commitment made to a customer by an exporter.
More importantly, these delays have financial implications.
A business waiting for its products to be delivered may be unable to use the capital tied up in inventory or the shipping process for other purposes during that period. As delays become longer, working capital requirements may increase, and depending on the company's financing conditions, the associated costs may also grow.
In my view, this is precisely what companies should place greater emphasis on when evaluating logistics performance in the coming period: the economic value created by completing transportation on time and in a predictable manner, as much as the price of transportation itself.
For economies such as Türkiye, which have strong production and export capacities while also relying on imports for energy and various intermediate goods, the impact of these developments is even more significant.
On the one hand, there are increasing risks in global transportation; on the other, there are high financing costs.
The fact that Turkish lira-denominated commercial loan interest rates were around 49% in Türkiye at the beginning of October demonstrates why time lost in logistics can have significant financial consequences for businesses.
For manufacturers that use imported inputs in particular, a delay in the arrival of raw materials does not simply mean that materials arrive late. Production planning, inventory management, order fulfillment, and cash flow can all be affected by such delays.
For exporters, the issue is not merely being able to sell products at competitive prices. The ability to deliver products to customers under the agreed conditions and within a predictable timeframe is also an important component of competitiveness.
For this reason, I believe that when assessing Türkiye's position in global trade, we must focus not only on the capacity of our logistics infrastructure but also on our industry's ability to adapt to changing conditions, the reliability of the services we provide, and our operational efficiency.
It is not difficult to foresee that global trade will continue to be affected by geopolitical developments, security challenges, and changing economic conditions in the period ahead.
However, I do not believe that focusing solely on increasing risks is sufficient in the face of this situation.
The real issue is how we manage these risks.
For logistics companies, in addition to the ability to develop alternative sourcing and transportation options, measuring delivery reliability and evaluating inventory and financing planning together with logistics decisions are becoming increasingly important.
Logistics planning is no longer simply a decision about which transportation method to use after a product has been sold. In some markets, it is a strategic factor that determines the conditions under which a sale can be made, the price that can be offered, and the type of delivery commitment that can be made to the customer.
I believe this transformation will also influence how companies approach competition in the coming years.
The multimillion-dollar cost difference that emerged within just a few weeks for a single tanker voyage from the Black Sea to India is, in fact, a small reflection of a much larger economic issue.
What will be decisive for the future of global trade is not merely the ability to develop new routes and solutions in response to crises, but the ability to combine this creativity with effective cost management, the preservation of delivery reliability, and making trade more predictable.
I believe that this is precisely where the real competitive advantage of the coming period will take shape.
With Love and Respect,
Emre Eldener
Vice Chairman of the Board Kıta Logistics
We provide agile, tailor made solutions for your most challenging and complex logistics operations!
