Port infrastructure is one of those asset classes where value is shaped not only by the size of the land plot or the current condition of the site. The main value is created by location, access to cargo flows, proximity to a deep-water port, railway and road connections, scalability, and the potential for integration into international logistics.
In this context, Ukraine has a truly rare strategic asset — a unique 100-hectare land plot near the Port of Pivdennyi in Odesa Region, which could become the basis for creating a powerful port-rail logistics hub of international significance.
The land plots are located in close proximity to the TIS port hub, the Port of Pivdennyi, and the Odesa Portside Plant. They have railway and road access, access to water, and the potential to develop stevedoring, logistics, industrial, and port facilities.
Structurally, the land bank consists of several functional zones: 3 hectares near the water with the possibility of creating a berth line, 56 hectares for a railway station-HUB, 23 hectares for a dry port or industrial and warehouse zone, 14 hectares for a container or multi-cargo terminal, and 4 hectares for additional industrial or warehouse facilities. Among the key technical advantages are declared depths of up to 19 meters along the shoreline, the possibility of organizing a conveyor connection to the water, and a preliminarily approved concept design for a railway station-HUB with a transshipment potential of 2 to 10 million tonnes per year.
For an investor, the question is not only what can be built on this land, but how exactly the asset can be capitalized. Depending on the investment approach, there are several scenarios — from independent development of port infrastructure to speculative holding of the asset until post-war recovery.
1. Strategic investor: own logistics, trading, and control over margins
The most obvious scenario is the acquisition of the asset by a strategic investor that already works with cargo flows or plans to create its own export logistics. This could be an agribusiness trader, an oilseed producer, a metallurgical or mining group, an oil and gas transshipment operator, a container operator, a logistics company, an industrial holding, or an international port operator.
In this case, land near the Port of Pivdennyi becomes not a passive asset, but a tool for controlling the supply chain. The investor can earn not only from transshipment, but also across the entire logistics chain: cargo accumulation, railway delivery, storage, processing, forwarding, freight, trading, and export margins.
For an agribusiness trader, this could be a “field-to-vessel” model: purchasing grain or oilseeds, delivering them by rail, storing, processing, transshipping, and selling them on international markets. For an industrial group, it could be its own export channel for ore, metal products, construction materials, or other raw materials. For a container operator, it could be the creation of a multimodal hub combining sea, rail, and road transport.
The Ukrainian market already has examples of international companies entering port infrastructure specifically to control export logistics. Cargill, together with MV Cargo, implemented the Neptune grain terminal in the Port of Pivdennyi with an annual capacity of 5 million tonnes of grain and investments of around $150 million; DP World acquired a 51% stake in TIS Container Terminal in the Port of Pivdennyi in 2020, viewing Ukraine as part of the global supply chain.
For a strategic investor, the main logic is simple: the asset provides an opportunity not to pay other operators for critical infrastructure, but to create its own profit center. Earnings are generated not only from the increase in land value, but also from operating cash flow from logistics, transshipment, storage, and trading.
2. Speculative investor: buy at a discount now and sell at a higher price after the war
The second scenario is the acquisition of the asset by a financial or speculative investor betting on the recovery of the value of strategic port land after the end of the war or a reduction in security risks.
During wartime, such assets trade at a significant risk discount. The buyer assumes risks related to time, war, liquidity, legal structuring, and future development. But this is exactly what may create potential upside: after the situation stabilizes, available sites near deep-water ports may become significantly more expensive due to limited supply.
The argument in favor of future demand is already visible in the market. Ukrainian seaports handled 82.2 million tonnes of cargo in 2025, achieving more than 95% of the planned target despite security pressure. In 2024, the port system reached 97.2 million tonnes of cargo turnover, confirming the continued fundamental demand for maritime logistics.
An additional signal is investor interest in the Chornomorsk concession. The project attracted the attention of more than 40 international port operators and investors, indicating that even during the war, major players are exploring opportunities to enter Ukraine’s port infrastructure.
Therefore, the logic of a speculative investor may be as follows: acquire a unique asset during a period of high uncertainty, carry out basic preparation — legal structuring, concept development, preliminary design, technical conditions, negotiations with potential operators — and sell it after the war not simply as “land,” but as a prepared infrastructure platform.
It can be assumed that after the war, a multiple increase in value may be possible. Available land plots of this scale near deep-water ports are a limited resource. A port location cannot be “created” just anywhere: it requires the simultaneous presence of water, depths, railway access, road connections, an industrial environment, and the ability to accumulate cargo.
3. Buy the asset and attract a port operator as a partner
The third scenario is the acquisition of the asset by an investor that does not plan to build and operate a terminal independently, but wants to act as the owner of the site and attract a specialized partner: a port operator, logistics company, agribusiness trader, oil and gas trader, infrastructure developer, or international strategic investor.
In this model, the landowner contributes the key resource to the partnership — the site, location, legal structure, and initial concept. The operator or developer brings industry expertise, cargo flows, technological solutions, CAPEX, a team, and access to customers. As a result, the landowner may receive a stake in the future project, fixed rent, an option to sell a stake, or a combination of these instruments.
This is especially logical for a financial investor that understands the value of the asset but does not have its own port team. Its task is to properly “package” the asset: to show the potential operator not just 100 hectares of land, but a terminal development scenario with projected cargo flows, CAPEX stages, railway connection opportunities, access to water, and potential economics.
4. Preparing the asset to a ready-to-build stage and selling it at a higher price
Another option is not to build port infrastructure independently, but to create added value at the project preparation stage. An investor can buy the asset, carry out legal, technical, and urban planning preparation, detail the concept, develop a preliminary design, obtain or update technical conditions, prepare a financial model, and create a package for a strategic buyer.
In this case, earnings are generated through the transition from “raw land” to a “prepared port development project.” The price difference between these two stages can be significant, because the buyer pays not only for hectares, but also for reduced entry risk, a clear development plan, and a shorter path to implementation.
For international operators, this is especially important. They often do not want to start from scratch: independently dealing with land issues, designated use, connections, access roads, railway logistics, environmental matters, and local approvals. If the asset is already prepared, it becomes much more liquid.
5. Development with long-term leasing to port and industrial residents
An investor can earn not only through sale or terminal construction, but also through a port landlord-developer model. In this model, the landowner does not necessarily operate cargo flows directly. Instead, it creates an infrastructure site and leases land plots or facilities to residents on a long-term basis.
Potential tenants may include grain traders, logistics operators, warehouses, freight forwarders, manufacturers, agricultural processing companies, container operators, service companies, repair facilities, customs and warehouse operators, or industrial enterprises that require proximity to the port.
In this scenario, the asset can be transformed into a private port-industrial park. The investor earns from rent, service fees, access to internal infrastructure, management of railway operations, warehouse services, and growth in land value as the site is filled with residents.
This is a less risky model than building a full-scale deep-water terminal with the investor’s own capital, since development can be carried out in stages: first a dry port and warehouses, then a railway hub, and later specialized terminals or industrial facilities.
6. Dividing the asset into functional plots and phased monetization
Since the land bank is already structured into different functional zones, an investor can consider not one large project, but several separate business areas. For example, the waterfront part can be developed for berth infrastructure, 56 hectares for a railway station-HUB, 23 hectares for a dry port, 14 hectares for a container or multi-cargo terminal, and the remaining area for warehouses or industrial facilities.
This creates the opportunity for phased monetization: one part can be sold to a strategic investor, another leased out, a third contributed to a JV, and a fourth retained for future value growth. This approach reduces the need for large upfront CAPEX and allows development to be adapted to market demand.
For a financial investor, this may be the most flexible scenario. It is not tied to a single operator or one type of cargo, but can create a “port constructor” for different buyers: agribusiness, containers, bulk cargo, liquid cargo, warehouses, and industrial logistics.
Conclusion
In summary, the investment offer of a 100-hectare land plot near the Port of Pivdennyi is not a classic land investment. It is an infrastructure bet on the future of Ukrainian maritime logistics.
A strategic investor can earn from its own logistics, trading, transshipment, and control over the export chain. A financial investor can buy the asset at a wartime discount and sell it after market stabilization as a unique port development platform. A partnership model allows a port operator or trader to be attracted and the land to be capitalized through joint development. The landlord model makes it possible to create a port-industrial park with long-term rental income. And preparing the asset to a ready-to-build stage can itself create significant added value.
The main investment idea is that such assets rarely appear on the open market. Therefore, for an investor, this may be not just the purchase of land, but entry into an exclusive and unique strategic port asset, whose value will be determined by the future recovery of Ukrainian exports, logistics, and industry.
