TPM 2026 wrapped in Long Beach last week against an extraordinary backdrop. U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28 and the resulting closure of the Strait of Hormuz had already reshaped the agenda before the first session opened on March 1. What attendees had planned to discuss gave way to something far more urgent, and beneath the immediate crisis, the conversations on the conference floor pointed to something larger: a structural shift in how companies think about supply chain strategy.
Brad McBride, CEO of Zero Down Supply Chain Solutions, came away from TPM26 with six observations that he believes define where the industry is heading.
“TPM26 signals a structural shift in supply chain strategy. Margin pressure and tariffs are forcing cost discipline. Strategic carrier partnerships are replacing transactional freight buying. Resilience remains critical but must be economically justified. AI and digital platforms are entering operational scale. Trade policy risk is now a central supply chain planning input. The logistics market is consolidating toward integrated ecosystem players.”
Brad McBride, CEO, Zero Down Supply Chain Solutions
Freight Spend Is Now Under Continuous Scrutin
Margin pressure from tariff uncertainty and slower demand growth has moved freight spend from a line item reviewed annually to one scrutinized continuously. According to BIMCO’s December 2025 Container Shipping Market Overview, North American import container volumes are projected to grow 2% in 2026 after a 3% contraction in 2025. That forecast predates the Strait of Hormuz closure; the ongoing disruption may materially alter the second-half outlook. Either way, this is not a demand environment that tolerates loose freight budgets. Freight audit is no longer a back-office reconciliation function in that model. It becomes part of the cost discipline infrastructure.
Transactional Freight Buying Is Losing Ground
Buying freight transactionally made sense when capacity was abundant and rates were predictable. Neither of those conditions reliably holds anymore. At TPM26, conversations about the Gemini Cooperation between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd underscored that carriers are consolidating toward integrated service models. Shippers who continue to buy transactionally are working against that grain. The quality of a shipper’s contract, specifically how precisely it defines rates, surcharges, equipment availability, and dispute resolution, now matters more than it ever did. For a practical framework on building that kind of agreement, see how to optimize your carrier contracts.
Resilience Has to Pencil Out
The push for supply chain resilience after 2020 produced redundant inventory and parallel carrier relationships that looked prudent during a crisis and expensive in a normalized market. TPM26 reflected a recalibration. DHL CEO Tobias Meyer noted that companies were beginning to explore Indian subcontinent ports as potential transshipment waypoints for Gulf-bound cargo, while air freight was discussed as a mode option for high-value shipments given regional airspace disruptions. The question is no longer “are we resilient?” but “what does resilience cost and what risk does it hedge?”
AI Is Being Measured on Outcomes, Not Promise
Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen presented the company’s AI-powered customs compliance and freight automation tools at TPM26, including an auditing system that reduced their customs filing error rate from 1.8% to 0.2%, approximately ten times better than the industry benchmark. Flexport Atlas, a real-time vessel and route tracking platform, powers AI-driven container optimization. The broader signal from the technology sessions: AI is no longer being evaluated on potential but on measurable operational results. The ocean freight tracking blind spots that cost shippers during the 2024 Red Sea disruption accelerated investment in visibility tools, and TPM26 suggested that investment is producing returns.
Trade Policy Is Now a Planning Input, Not a Contingency
Tariff structures, trade agreement status, and the possibility of route disruption from geopolitical events are being built into annual planning cycles. The Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC) raised these concerns directly at TPM26, focusing on how volatile U.S. trade policy is undermining agricultural exporters and making it harder to structure carrier agreements around predictable cost assumptions. A contract negotiated without accounting for tariff exposure or alternative routing costs is a contract that may not perform as modeled.
TPM26 produced more questions than signed contracts. The Hormuz crisis displaced much of the negotiation that normally defines the week, and the structural questions Brad describes do not have clean answers yet. What the conference did produce was a clearer direction: more cost discipline, more strategic depth in carrier relationships, more accountability from technology, and more integration across logistics providers.
If you want to talk through what any of these shifts mean for your freight spend and carrier strategy, Zero Down’s team is available for a consultation.
