Bunker buying is “broken”, according to James Peacock, the founder of XMAR, whose company, founded last year in Cyprus, has set out to give shipping a retail model for bunkers similar to how Amazon transformed online shopping.
“Bunker buying is behind the rest of the industry, negotiations on WhatsApp, no clear price comparisons, and little data to back up decisions,” Peacock argues in conversation with Splash Extra.
Shipping companies are structured to be tactical, not strategic, Peacock reckons. Each department is focused on cutting its own costs for every voyage, which makes sense in theory. But in reality, according to Peacock, this approach doesn’t lead to the most profitable outcome. It ignores knock-on effects like port congestion, extra PDA fees, emissions costs and the long-term impact of poor fuel choices.
Many still see transparency as a risk rather than an advantage
“Bunker buying is still stuck in the past. Send out an enquiry, get a few offers, negotiate, and fix a $300,000 order in 15 minutes, often on WhatsApp,” Peacock says. “Every deal is done in isolation, with little thought given to how fuel procurement fits into the bigger picture of voyage optimisation.”
Then there’s how performance is measured across transactions, voyages and individual roles. Operators and bunker officers’ performance is rarely based on numbers even though they could be.
“Ask them how they assess a good bunker deal, and the answer is usually vague. It’s about relationships and keeping things easy, even if that means paying over the odds,” Peacock says.
Until shipping companies take a more strategic approach and use data to drive procurement decisions, they will continue to miss opportunities to reduce costs and improve efficiency, he argues.
Bunkering has always been a grey area, Peacock concedes.
“Pricing is vague, quality is inconsistent, and there’s more room for fraud than in almost any other part of the shipping industry. Short deliveries, off-spec fuel and hidden fees have been happening for decades because there’s no transparency or accountability,” he points out.
That’s starting to change. Singapore’s move to mandate electronic bunker delivery notes from April 2025 is a step in the right direction. Likewise, the EU ETS is also forcing shipowners to be more honest about fuel consumption, making it harder to manipulate figures.
The problem, according to Peacock, is a lot of people in shipping don’t actually want transparency.
“Procurement teams like doing things their own way. Operators prefer quick deals with trusted suppliers. Many still see transparency as a risk rather than an advantage. And as long as performance is judged by gut feel instead of hard numbers, the old ways will persist,” Peacock says.
Regulation will force some level of transparency, but the real change has to come from buyers, their companies, their owners demanding better, he insists.
“Those who push for clear pricing, fair contracts, and supplier accountability will get better deals and fewer headaches. Those who don’t will keep playing the same expensive guessing game,” says Peacock.
XMAR gives buyers full transparency over pricing, contract terms, and credit options. The platform provides reporting tools that let buyers compare their fuel costs against bunker price indices, track supplier performance, and see the difference between the highest and lowest offers on every order.
“It turns bunker purchasing from a gut-feel process into a numbers game,” Peacock claims, adding: “XMAR puts shipping companies in control, giving them the tools to get better prices, reduce fraud risks, and make smarter, more profitable fuel decisions.”
Energy News Beat