Inside Baton and the Economics of Relay Networks in Truckload

The most interesting part of Baton was not the technology but the economic thesis. If you can convert a 1,500 mile haul into three tightly synchronized regional legs, you change the cost structure of trucking. Before Baton, relay networks were something UPS and FedEx executed inside closed systems. Baton asked what would happen if the same logic was applied to the open truckload market. The math worked. The challenge was building enough density, consistency, and multi-party coordination in a fragmented ecosystem that was never designed for synchronized exchanges.

Baton launched in 2019 with a high conviction thesis: the long haul model in the United States is structurally inefficient. Drivers lose between 16% and 22% of their miles to deadhead. Turnover at large fleets sits above 80% annually, driven heavily by unpredictable schedules and long stretches away from home. Trailer pools underperform. Asset turns lag. The economic waste is so consistent that it is considered normal. Baton believed that a relay network could convert this wasted friction into margin by redesigning how freight moved through the system rather than trying to fix individual carriers.

The core idea was simple. Break long haul freight into regional segments. Create scheduled transfers. Bring drivers home daily. Improve asset turns by increasing trailer velocity. Lower cost per mile by replacing OTR fatigue with predictable regional networks. The difficulty was never the math. The difficulty was building enough volume in the right places at the right times to create a true network effect.

To execute this vision, Baton built a network of handoff nodes around major metros and freight corridors. These were not yards in the traditional sense. They were micro transfer zones designed to anchor high frequency O and D pairs. If the network matured, Baton would not need dozens of sites. Only enough to seed predictable exchanges for high density lanes like Los Angeles to Dallas or Atlanta to Chicago. In theory, once handoff cadence was stable, carriers could plug in and receive more miles with less variability.

Baton also built scheduling and assignment technology to match drivers, appointments, and trailer transfers. They created planning software to simulate relay schedules, HOS windows, and overlapping duty cycles. They raised more than 100 million dollars to commercialize the platform, including a strategic partnership with Ryder that signaled traditional transportation companies were willing to experiment with new operating models. The company had the talent, funding, and early partners required to test whether a relay network could scale outside the integrator world.

The operational results were promising. Baton’s internal models showed that a three leg relay could move freight 20 to 30 hours faster than a single driver running the entire lane while staying fully compliant with HOS. Regional drivers could generate more paid miles per duty day because they were not losing time to long detention, overnight resets, or terminal routing. Carriers could reduce turnover by giving drivers consistent home time. Trailer velocity increased because trailers were constantly moving rather than waiting for a single long haul driver to complete a multiday route. Every variable pointed in the same direction: greater efficiency at scale.

But scale was the problem. Relay networks depend on density, synchronization, and predictable freight flow. The open truckload market is built around fragmentation. More than 90 percent of carriers operate fewer than 10 trucks. Most freight is sold as irregular route capacity. Schedules shift daily. Appointments move. Facilities run behind. The system is too dynamic for tight synchronization unless a critical mass of volume is aggregated under a single planning engine. Baton did not get enough time or market adoption to reach that point.

The other challenge was economic sequencing. Relay networks create value only when there is enough balanced freight to fill both directions of a corridor. Without depth on both sides, handoff sites become cost centers instead of throughput engines. Integrators solve this with package density and fixed schedules. In truckload, density is more difficult to produce without hundreds of shippers agreeing to move consistently through the same nodes. That type of cooperation is rare.

Baton was acquired by Ryder in 2022. The acquisition was not a failure. It reflected a deeper truth about logistics innovation. Some ideas require the balance sheet, customer base, and time horizon of a scaled incumbent. Ryder already runs dedicated fleets, large trailer pools, and multi-shipper distribution networks. It has the operational footprint that Baton needed to validate the model at scale. The acquisition simply accelerated the integration.

The legacy of Baton is not the software or the real estate footprint. It is the proof that relay economics work even in fragmented markets when modeled correctly. Baton showed that a carefully designed relay structure can:

• Reduce long haul transit times by double digit percentages

• Improve driver utilization and paid miles per day

• Increase trailer turns and reduce capital intensity

• Lower cost per delivered mile in balanced lanes

These results matter because the structural inefficiencies Baton targeted have not gone away. Every year the American trucking industry burns billions of dollars in empty miles, detention, and underutilized assets. The economic opportunity still exists. The question is which company will align enough data, scheduling control, and network participation to make relays viable at national scale.

If the next generation of relay systems succeeds, it will be because they build what Baton could not finish: a planning engine with broad market visibility, a deep carrier bench of regional operators, and a path to network density that compounds over time. The thesis remains sound. The execution requires patience, data, and coordination that extends beyond any single carrier.

The story of Baton is not one of failure. It is a case study in timing. Relay economics work. The operational math is proven. The market was not ready for an independent relay network, but the idea continues to resurface because the incentives are powerful. If the industry ever aligns around shared relay infrastructure, Baton will be remembered as the company that built the first blueprint