Foodservice Redistribution and Operator Deviated Pricing

Imagine the following scenario:

$20.00  Case price you would sell to a local distributor for a truckload order

$15.00  Bid price you are offering that same distributor for a piece of local operator business

$ 5.00   Case rate you expect to pay that distributor for each case they sell that operator

 

$18.00  Case price to an authorized redistributor for a truckload order [net of a $2.00 redi allowance passed through off invoice]

$24.00  Price that same redistributor charges the local distributor who is servicing the bid

$ 9.00   Case rate that distributor deducts for each case sold to that bid account   

 

The incremental $4.00 has no revenue offset, it is sourced purely from your operating income.  This is a simple scenario that is playing out across the foodservice industry with increasing frequency as the need for supply chain efficiency and order optimization drives the popularity of redistribution.  The magic question in this scenario is how to best control the variance.  If your organization is struggling to process deviated price deductions against redi volume, the following are some pragmatic suggestions for defining and controlling the financial exposure to your business. 

[More]

The Proliferation of Operator Deviated Pricing

No less than 10 years ago, what many of us in foodservice now refer to as “the good old days,” the majority of operator discounts and allowances were rebates – this much per case or that much per pound.  For special situations where the volume was large and the operator actually committed to buying your product, you would reluctantly offer a deviated price.  Those prices were well-controlled and were only offered after a thorough analysis and justification process.  The reasons most folks were reluctant to “open the flood gates” back then still hold true today –

  • Deviated prices carry higher administrative costs than rebates due to the ambiguity of the effective claim rate.
     
  • Uncertainty around how much of the discounted price would ever reach the operator.
     
  • Risk that distributors would “go up and down the street” with the hot price, upsetting balance in the market and costing you money for volume that did not require the discount in the first place [the elusive “full list price street business”]. 

Flashing forward to 2010, the new reality is that Chet’s Chevron in Small Fry, Mississippi, now receives multiple deviated pricing offers on just about every category.  The flood gates aren’t open … they have been removed from their hinges and thrown away.  It’s at this point in the conversation that I often hear “that’s just the cost of doing business in foodservice.”  Before we jump to that conclusion, consider the following statistics from a recent survey of the industry:

[More]

Formulating Trade Funds Strategy and Positioning

While the foodservice industry has always been challenging for even the strongest competitors, the current environment presents a unique set of demands that few have faced in their careers --

  • Increasing pressure from operators to provide pricing based on ‘lowest imaginable costs’ and structured to ensure each location receives the full benefit of their purchasing leverage [eg, ship-to based freight allocations for delivered pricing].
  • Accelerated demands from the distributor community for incremental sheltered income at both the corporate and local levels, often without logical supporting rationale or apparent benefit to offset the incremental investment.
  • Daily struggles to retain existing volumes in the face of a broad decline in consumption across most segments and categories.
     
  • An ongoing internal war to ‘keep the ship afloat’ in the face of volatile costs, high levels of organizational stress and a generally gloomy outlook for the future.

Over the past 20 years, I have been fortunate to spend time with a wide range of senior executives from many of the leading suppliers to the foodservice industry.  One observation, and this is no big surprise, is that their schedules are jam-packed with meetings, every day and every week, all year long. Yet, the amount of executive energy devoted to the strategy and positioning for pricing, trade spending and operator allowances is pretty low.  What makes this so puzzling is that just about everyone agrees that the total amount of money spent on these activities is easily the 2nd or 3rd largest item in their corporate P&L. 

By comparison, an engagement of the executive team in the definition and execution of trade and pricing strategy promises a return on an investment that outweighs the majority of competing activities by a factor of 10X or more.  What is your organization doing today to address the opportunity?

 

[More]

© 2012 Blacksmith Applications, Inc.