Logistics Rates for 2027: Who Will Ultimately Foot the Bill?

The annual rate negotiations have begun again. This means the 2027 logistics rates are now on the table: carriers are presenting their prices, fulfillment companies are reviewing their contracts, and online retailers are trying to get a handle on their future costs.

But I think this year we need to look beyond just the usual price increases.

Because in addition to rising costs and fluctuating volumes, there is another trend in the parcel market: the growing role of companies that consolidate shipping volumes and resell transportation rates.

A price increase for logistics rates in 2027 requires justification

Personnel, energy, facilities, vehicles, and investments in distribution networks entail significant costs. It is understandable that carriers must adjust their rates periodically.

Incidentally, the same applies to fulfillment companies.

Still, an annual rate increase should not become automatic. When rates rise, business customers should be able to expect a clear explanation of the basis for that increase.

Service quality is also a key factor. How reliable is the delivery service? What improvements have been made? And what can customers expect in 2027?

A higher rate does not necessarily have to be unreasonable, but it must be consistent with the agreements made and the services provided.

More volume does not automatically mean better rates

Shipping volume plays an important role during annual negotiations.

Online stores are growing, fulfillment companies are investing in capacity, and carriers are trying to use their networks as efficiently as possible.

Higher volume can lead to economies of scale. However, the cost per package also depends on destinations, package sizes, pickup times, and the distribution of shipments throughout the year. You can learn more about how a fulfillment rate is calculated in our knowledge center.

That is why it makes sense for carriers to look beyond just the total number of packages.

At the same time, a carrier should be expected to take demonstrable volume growth seriously into account in its commercial agreements.

But this also gives rise to an interesting contrast.

Why shouldn't a company that actually invests in logistics processes, personnel, and infrastructure be evaluated at least as seriously as a broker whose main focus is handling large volumes of shipments?

The Growing Role of Stackers

Within the parcel market, there are companies that consolidate shipping volumes from various customers in order to secure attractive shipping rates.

There's nothing wrong with that.

For smaller online stores, volume bundling can actually offer advantages. It gives them access to rates and services that would be harder to obtain on their own.

But there is an important difference between companies that actually add value in logistics and those whose business model consists primarily of aggregating and reselling shipping volumes.

When multiple commercial intermediaries profit from the same shipment without making a demonstrable operational contribution, the question arises as to what value they actually add.

In the short term, a carrier can benefit from the additional volume that such shipments generate. In the longer term, however, there is a risk that commercial dependence will increase and the carrier’s own rate structure will come under pressure.

In my opinion, carriers should avoid giving unlimited space to these types of stacked models.

Not every form of volume bundling is undesirable. However, volume alone should not be sufficient to qualify for the most attractive commercial terms.

Strategic partnerships require different criteria

Carriers decide for themselves which parties to enter into strategic partnerships with.

In this regard, the focus should not only be on the number of packages, but above all on the quality and added value of the organization.

Is a partner actually investing in logistics infrastructure? Are the operational processes reliable? Are shipments delivered efficiently and accurately? And does the partnership demonstrably contribute to better service?

A professional fulfillment company invests daily in its employees, inventory management, order processing, systems, and quality. In doing so, it makes a tangible contribution to the logistics chain.

That contribution deserves to be recognized when entering into long-term carrier agreements.

In my previous article , “When Can You Call Yourself a Professional Fulfillment Company?”, I asked whether an independent certification mark or an objective quality framework could contribute to the further professionalization of our industry.

Such an assessment framework could be particularly valuable when selecting strategic partners.

Not to exclude smaller parties, but to give greater weight to demonstrable quality and operational added value than to shipping volume alone.

What does this mean for the online store?

Ultimately, the online store also benefits from a healthy supply chain.

A competitive shipping rate is attractive, but it doesn't tell the whole story when it comes to reliability, continuity, and the responsibilities of the parties involved.

When a shipment is delayed or a problem arises, the online store wants to know who is responsible and who will resolve the issue.

In our previous blog post , “Who Determines a Web Store’s Customer Satisfaction?,” we discussed why consumers ultimately judge a web store based on the entire ordering and delivery experience, regardless of which logistics provider is responsible for any errors.

That is precisely why price, quality, and clear agreements must go hand in hand.

A good logistics contract isn't just about the lowest rate, but about a partnership that adds value over the long term. To learn what factors influence a rate and how a proposal is put together, read " What Does Fulfillment Cost?".

In conclusion

As far as I'm concerned, the negotiations on the 2027 logistics rates should be about more than just annual price increases and volume discounts.

Carriers must carefully consider which parties they enter into strategic partnerships with.

A fulfillment company that invests in personnel, facilities, systems, and logistics processes truly adds value to the supply chain. The same can be said for an intermediary that demonstrably contributes to more efficient transportation or better service.

But when a revenue model revolves solely around increasing shipping volumes and reselling rates, without making any substantial operational contribution, we have to ask ourselves who ultimately benefits from this.

My message to carriers is therefore clear: don’t reward volume alone, but rather the value that a partner actually adds.

Because a healthy logistics market isn't created by adding more and more commercial intermediaries between carriers and online retailers, but by collaborating with parties that demonstrably strengthen the supply chain.