Red Sea reroutes again: how are you papering longer transit times in LCs and contracts?

We renegotiated all standing LCs after the first Cape winter: latest-shipment date tied to on-board date (ETD, never ETA), presentation period stretched to 30 days, and expiry set 45 days after latest shipment. Costs a little in fees upfront, saves an amendment cycle on every rerouted sailing. For contracts, we added a named-routing clause: freight surcharges for non-Suez routing pass through at documented cost.

On CIF insurance: our underwriter added a Gulf of Aden exclusion rider either way, so the premium delta between routings vanished. Check whether your policy actually prices the risk you think you're avoiding.

Stop amending and start issuing correctly: we moved every Asia-Europe LC to a 45-day presentation period with 'or such other routing as carrier may determine' in the shipment clause. Banks accepted it without a fight because it is descriptive, not a get-out. The amendment fees we were paying quarterly bought about six months of legal review, once.

On the CIF question: our underwriter repriced Gulf of Aden transits separately from the Cape routing, so the longer voyage was actually cheaper to insure than the short one through a war-risk area. Ask for the two quotes side by side before you assume the reroute costs you premium.

Watch the knock-on for anyone shipping under an FTA with a direct-transport rule. Two of our Japan-EU consignments transhipped at a port that was not on the original routing and the certificate needed a non-manipulation statement we had not budgeted time for. Longer transit is the visible cost; the paperwork is the one that bites.

Data point from Singapore this morning: two carriers quietly reinstated Suez routings for eastbound legs but kept the Cape surcharge on the westbound. Read the surcharge sheet line by line before you renegotiate anything.