APM Terminals' hub facilities serving the Gemini alliance network now handle more than 70% more moves per hour than they did a decade ago, according to chief executive Keith Svendsen — evidence, he argues, that the next phase of terminal growth will come from capital discipline and operational efficiency rather than from adding cranes and quay length.

In an interview with sister title Splash Ports, Svendsen laid out a view of the industry in which deepwater terminals in the right locations are becoming irreplaceable assets — but only for owners prepared to extract far more capacity from the infrastructure they already control.

The starting point is time. Terminal concessions typically run for 30 to 50 years, and Svendsen said investment decisions have to be made with that multi-decade horizon in mind. Quay walls, cranes and yard systems committed today will still be in service when the carriers calling at them have cycled through several alliance structures and vessel generations.

The commercial logic cuts both ways. For carriers, led by Gemini partners Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd, terminal productivity is a direct lever on schedule reliability: the hub-and-spoke network the alliance launched in February 2025 depends on tight transhipment windows, and every additional move per hour at a hub protects downstream departures. For terminal operators, higher throughput from the same footprint delays the need for capital-hungry expansion — a meaningful advantage in a market where greenfield capacity faces long permitting timelines and uncertain cargo demand.

APM Terminals credits its Lean-based operating system for much of the productivity gain across its Gemini-supporting hubs. The company ranks as the world's third-largest container terminal operator by total throughput, according to DynaLiners' 2025 rankings.

Svendsen's sharpest warning was reserved for operators who treat technology spending or capital projects as a substitute for disciplined operations.

"Without operational discipline, you simply buy a larger version of the same problem," he said.

The comment lands at a moment when terminal operators across the sector are weighing heavy commitments to automation, electric equipment and digital platforms. Svendsen's argument is that none of that spending compensates for weak yard planning, poor berth management or fragmented landside connections. His framing puts landside infrastructure — gates, drayage corridors, rail links — alongside operating discipline as the decisive variables, ahead of headline capacity additions.

For shippers and forwarders, the implication is that dwell times and gate fluidity at major transhipment hubs will increasingly depend on how hard operators push existing assets, rather than on when the next expansion phase opens. For carriers locked into 30-to-50-year concession structures, the operator's ability to lift productivity within the concession term shapes the long-run economics of the trade lanes those hubs serve.

Svendsen's trajectory points toward an industry where deepwater positions in the right locations harden into scarcity assets, and where the returns flow to operators that keep squeezing more moves from the same metal and concrete. On the evidence of the Gemini hubs' 70% productivity gain, that squeeze has room left to run.