Foodservice Outlook, 2020 (2 of 3)

This is a continuation of my earlier post, describing my thoughts and comments about the IFMA 2010 President's Conference.

I left off the first post describing Bill Hale's discussion of cost controls and efficiency...as relevant to the foodservice distributor. Bill had posed the question on whether it was more or less cost effective to have more trucks on the road distributing from fewer distribution centers.

Although my first instinct when I heard the question was to check my email, Twitter and Facebook accounts…I decided to listen instead. Actually, I couldn't get a strong wi-fi signal inside the conference room, so really the decision was made for me.

It turned out that listening was the better option. Even though I didn’t hear an answer that directly addressed concerns from the manufacturers standpoint, the ensuing discussion did get me thinking about the issue from our perspective.

As a manufacturer, I would much rather ship into 6, 12 or even 20 distribution points rather than say 82 individual distributor houses. I can manage my freight costs with more certainty. I can achieve better economies of scale by shipping (and thereby producing) more products at one time. And, it is easier on my receivables and cash flow.

The problem with my "solution" occurs from the distributor level, as far as I could predict. By having fewer distribution points, distributors will be shipping over longer distances. This means relatively more trucks with higher fuel costs and considerably more logistics planning.

But, could it work?

As Bill continued to speak about FS2020, my mind began building a distribution network that worked from a manufacturer’s perspective.

First, the organization would have a much leaner employee base with an increased focus on logistics instead of management. There would be a core group of personnel at each of the distribution points whose main focus was to facilitate the inbound and outbound shipments. Orders and AR/AP could be handled at a corporate location and delivered electronically to the few distribution centers and supplier partners, again minimizing the work force, preventing duplicate efforts and increasing efficiency.

Every distributor needs a sales force, but why not outsource it?

Instead of foodservice brokers working for manufacturers, why not have them handle the sales for the distributor? I mean, brokers maintain relationships with operators anyway. I would assume the cost for a distributor to reach an operator would decrease dramatically by utilizing a broker with existing relationships. As for chain account business, manufacturers already have people focused on selling the chain accounts. Why duplicate the efforts at the distribution level?

Plus, unlike the current manufacturer/broker relationship, a distributor would not necessarily have to exclusively align themselves with particular broker. A distributor could open up the marketplace to competition, and competition should help sell more items. If you’re a broker authorized to sell for a distributor, you can sell anything in the distributor book, and, you’ll get paid on everything you sell. Sales could be tracked by broker codes, making it easy to track commissions.

From a manufacturing perspective, since our broker fees were eliminated, we would be able to offer more distributor programming monies...which, since those monies would now be spread over a smaller executive base would translate into larger profits for distributor shareholders.

Yes, my mind wandered for a few minutes, and I am positive I missed the entire focus of Bill’s point. And yes, I know my scenario requires manufacturers and distributors to develop real partnerships, working openly to financially benefit these two sides of our industry and become more efficient.

But I couldn’t help wondering…what if??

--To be continued-- (Part 3 will post on Friday, November 19th)