The cross-border e-commerce circle has been hit hard again. Recently, several overseas warehouses around the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in the United States suddenly suspended operations, with warehouses being sealed by landlords and responsible persons going missing. Hundreds of thousands of containers of goods from Chinese sellers are stranded and even face disposal risks. This sudden incident has affected nearly 2,000 sellers, involving goods worth over 200 million yuan. Many companies have suffered losses of millions or even tens of millions of yuan per incident, and small and medium-sized sellers have also suffered heavy losses.
On the surface, this appears to be a sudden "runaway incident," but from an industry perspective, it is a concentrated outbreak of long-accumulated risks. Industry insiders point out that such overseas warehouse failures often follow a similar pattern: attracting customers with prices far below market levels, rapidly accumulating cargo volume and capital in a short period, and quickly exiting the market once the capital chain breaks. In this incident, some warehouses advertised a handling fee of only $0.38 per order, along with benefits such as free storage, which clearly deviates from normal cost structures. Based on industry-wide calculations, the fulfillment cost per item in the Los Angeles area is typically above $1, and the low-price strategy itself has sown the seeds of hidden dangers.
Further investigation revealed that some of the overseas warehouses involved are not self-operated but obtain warehouse space by subletting legitimate warehouses and then subletting them to sellers to earn the price difference. Once the operating party fails to pay the rent, the warehouse owner legally seizes the goods, making it difficult for sellers to protect their cargo rights. In addition, many sellers did not sign complete contracts when cooperating, or relied on simple agreements, lacking clear provisions on cargo ownership, division of responsibilities, and compensation mechanisms, making it extremely difficult to protect their rights after the incident.
The deeper reasons lie in the lack of regulation and the high cost of rights protection. The threshold for establishing warehousing enterprises in the United States is low, and there is a lack of a unified industry entry and regulatory system. Cross-border dispute resolution is long and costly, making the actual cost of violations relatively low. This has also, to some extent, fueled the repeated occurrence of phenomena such as low-price customer acquisition, capital operations, and even malicious fraud.
It is worth noting that even though similar risks have occurred in the industry multiple times, a large number of sellers still choose low-price warehouse services, the core reason being the continuous increase in cost pressure. Under fierce price competition, logistics costs have become one of the few compressible items. Some sellers have made wrong trade-offs between "cost reduction" and "risk," ultimately leading to greater losses.
The Los Angeles overseas warehouse incident once again sounds an alarm for the industry. Industry suggestions recommend that sellers, when choosing overseas warehouses, should focus on verifying the company's qualifications and warehouse sources, be wary of quotes significantly below market levels, and sign complete and compliant service contracts. At the same time, they should understand the service provider's reputation through multiple channels and avoid over-reliance on a single low-price solution.
In the long run, competition in cross-border e-commerce is no longer just a price war; supply chain stability is becoming the core competitiveness. Once overseas warehouses, as a critical link, are compromised, all previous investments will be swallowed up. Instead of blindly lowering costs, it is better to prioritize safety and compliance, which is the foundation for the sustainable development of cross-border business.