What Do The Definitions of Wholesaler and Manufacturer Really Mean?
by Scott Benfield
February 8, 2010
The
definitions of Wholesaler and Manufacturer have, in the minds of most industry
veterans, distinct meaning. Manufacturers turn raw material into products and
wholesalers take title to the products while providing a variety of services to
the established trade(s). In most instances, wholesalers, combine products and
services for an order that is large enough, in margin dollars, to cover its
processing costs. However, the definitions of Wholesaler and Manufacturer are
becoming blurred and, as they change, so will the value propositions of these
businesses. Because of the change in value, there will be a need to re-evaluate
and rework the basic understanding of how to maximize profits and the key
variables that need to be engaged to do so.
Global Supply Chain and Instant Information
Manufacturing
is now global and likely to stay that way. China has been the dominant
manufacturing center getting 410 billion in direct US investment and running a
trade surplus of 251 billion.[i] However,
there are a number of countries that are becoming havens of manufacturing for
the HVAC/Plumbing industry and products are found across the globe including
Thailand, Taiwan, Japan, Philippines, India, Eastern Europe and Brazil. Wherever
one looks, there is seemingly a new vendor sourcing from a new country.
Accompanying
the expansion of global manufacturing is the easy access to price and
availability both from the manufacturer and the distributor. Distributors can
access any number of sites and find out the global price and availability of
products as evidenced by the China business manufacturer’s site www.Alibaba.com. Accordingly, distributor customers can find price and
availability from any number of distributors’ sites replete with substantial
product content.
The
upshot of instant and readily available information is that it is very
difficult to maintain a price premium in the market unless it can be justified
by demonstrably better products or services. In essence, the products or
services must save the
user costs though a lower first price, more efficient services, services that
save money, products with better lifecycle costs or those that visibly save
labor and warranty costs. Today, with the availability of information,
distributors and manufacturers will need to be much more in touch with their
value propositions and their demonstrable savings than they were in the recent
past.
[i]
US Trade Statistics, Latest Information, http://www.ustr.gov/countries-regions/china/
For Manufacturers it’s About Supply Chain Services and Their Costs
In
a recent address to an industry association of both manufacturers and
distributors, I made an informal survey of the number of manufacturing firms
who operated full or partial import models versus ownership of plant, property
and equipment. The figure was approximately half of the manufacturers
represented had changed their mode of business from owning the fixed assets to
having part, or all of their business as an import model. The strategic change
implied in an import model business is that the fundamental behavior of costs
moves from a contribution model of leveraging fixed costs with unit volume to
an aggressive step cost business where the strategic costs are service based
and less product based.
In
the past, manufacturers that made their products had much of their costs in the
cost of goods in the way of direct labor, direct overhead and direct material. Today,
however, with import business models, the strategic costs, the ones that have
to be managed for profitability, are those of supply chain services and these
costs are located in the operating expense(s) of the income statement. In
addition, the import business model moves from individual products as a means
of profitability to transactions as the primary unit of profit. Unless the
transaction is large enough, in margin dollars, to cover its costs, the import
model loses money. And, to understand transaction costs, the import based
manufacturer has a need for better and more sophisticated accounting systems
that allocate supply chain costs to customers, transaction types, and market
segments.
The
failure of manufacturers in understanding the changes when moving from a fixed
cost structure to an aggressive step cost structure are real. Several months
ago, I was invited to visit a well-know company in the PHCP industry. The
company was, from a product standpoint, best in class. However, over the years,
their position as an industry leader had been supplanted by a supply chain/import
based competitor. The competitor expanded the product line with imports that
complemented manufactured product. The expanded product line was attractive to
wholesalers because it provided better inventory turns, inventory balancing,
pricing gains from consolidation, and brought down purchasing and payables
costs. The issue, for the company who stayed as a manufacturer, is that they
did not understand the advantages of reducing supply chain costs for their
distribution as their focus on value was product and technology based and not
supply chain based. I had little good news for the firm as it appeared that
they were far behind in developing a supply chain model and their sight was
fixed on developing new and better products; the value proposition from times
past.
In
summation, for manufacturers who develop import-based models, it is crucial
that these firms move away from practices and policies based on a fixed cost
structure and the knowledge and practices that flow from that. Import business
models are aggressive step cost structures and accounting systems must develop
allocations that give these firms insights into what is profitable and what is
not. Our work in cost allocations for import-based businesses finds that many
transactions, customers, and markets are not profitable and, if the firm had
known this before they were engaged, they would have questioned pursuing these
revenue streams. To date, there has been little research into the issues
involved in manufacturers going from a fixed cost to step cost structure.
However, initial work in the area
finds that significant profits await manufacturers who investigate and better
understand their supply chain costs.[ii]
[ii]
See “Leveraging the Supply Chain, How Manufacturers can Improve Profits,
Deloitte-Touche, 2005 at http://www.assemblymag.com/Articles/Web_Exclusive/7ee6022c106c9010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0
The Wholesaler Conundrum: Direct Source, Importer, Alliances or Domestic Brand
As
global manufacturing explodes, costs come down rapidly in most products as low
cost countries begin to compete for orders in established economies. Depending
on the product and country of manufacture, our research has found that imports,
on average, offer a 30% cost advantage over domestic brands, regardless of
where those brands are manufactured. Furthermore, at a 30% saturation rate of
imports to domestic brands, it becomes almost financially impossible for
distributors to compete if they remain 100% loyal to domestic brands. With the
movement of manufacturing offshore, wholesalers sit in an enviable, albeit
risky, position in the supply chain.
The
big strategic question facing wholesalers is how to remain competitive in a
global environment where best in cost and service can change, seemingly,
overnight. Wholesalers literally can’t afford to blindly cement vendor
relationships with domestic brands that may lose their standing, rather
quickly, to lower cost products produced offshore. Some domestic manufacturers
can compete quite well with offshore products with limited brand recognition,
but there are less of these companies around as time progresses.
The
movement of the value in the channel toward supply chain services has many
opportunities and pitfalls for today’s wholesaler. They must decide who their
strategic vendors are and this requires constant monitoring. In our research, offshore
products are an increasing part of the wholesaler’s inventory. And, this
inventory, can come from distinct sources including importers, alliances with
other wholesalers, direct sourcing from the foreign manufacturer, or domestic
brands. Wholesalers who understand this and develop their global supply chains
have significant advantage over those who don’t. The desire to monitor and
source globally the best combination of product and price must be made, individually,
by each wholesale firm. Simply because one is part of a buying group or
alliance does not automatically spell success in developing a low cost supply
chain. The discipline takes work and much change in the purchasing and vendor
interaction processes must take place. The firm may have to develop a product
management function where vendor planning includes supply chain metrics and
information sharing-events that are seldom engaged by the purchasing
function.
In
recent press, it has been common to cite that wholesalers have more channel
power because of the movement of value from production to supply chain service
provision. This statement, while partially true, needs clarification. In my
perspective, the shift in value favors the wholesaler since wholesalers are,
primarily, providers of supply chain services. To say any one wholesaler’s
power in the channel is enhanced is only true as it relates to that company’s
desire to develop a competitive global supply chain.
New Definitions and New Disciplines
Because
of the globalization of manufacturing, instant information from the Internet,
and the shift of industrial channels from production to supply chain services,
manufacturing and wholesaling are different businesses than they were a decade
ago. Manufacturers and wholesalers are now supply chain service providers. Where
they fit and how they add value in the chain is dependent on the services they
identify and provide.
It
is also important to note that supply chains are becoming more efficient at an
increasing rate and misidentifying one’s service value or taking it for granted
can cause quick pain in lost business and profits. New disciplines will be
needed for supply chain providers including better understanding of service
costs for manufacturers and wholesalers and a more comprehensive and robust
discipline of managing, planning with, and evaluating vendors than is currently
available in most wholesaler purchasing functions. Those who understand how the
disciplines have changed, the new definitions, and what to do about them, will
be the leaders of tomorrow.
|