You’re comparing two fastener quotes while building next year’s budget. One supplier offers a part at eight cents. Another quotes nine cents. At 100,000 parts a year, the first option appears to save $1,000.
That difference deserves attention. But before you make a decision, what else should you compare?
How much work goes into ordering those parts? What does it cost to get them to your facility? Could a different design simplify assembly?
Fastener total cost of ownership brings those questions into the comparison. At Field, we look beyond piece price to understand what a fastener costs your operation, from sourcing and inventory to assembly and quality. Then we work with your team to identify which costs can realistically be reduced.
In one customer project, Field’s engineering team reviewed a welded two-piece custom fastener and worked with manufacturers to develop a one-piece alternative. We provided a proposal drawing and samples. After testing, the customer approved the change, resulting in $33,310 in annual piece-price savings.
In another example, an on-site Field VMI representative noticed eight zip-tie sizes on one production line. Working with the customer’s engineering team, Field eliminated four items. The case reports $39,670 in savings.
Read the part-consolidation example.
Both opportunities started with understanding how the parts were used.
A practical framework for a review with Field covers six connected areas:
Use purchasing, inventory, production, and quality records to establish the baseline. Recorded losses belong in the cost comparison; future risks also need a response plan.
Purchase price is what you pay for the part. Landed cost adds the expense of getting it to your facility. If one quote includes freight and another charges it separately, the unit prices are not directly comparable.
Match specifications, drawing revisions, annual volume, order quantities, delivery requirements, and price validity. Larger minimum orders may lower piece price while increasing inventory.
Any proposed alternative still needs the appropriate technical review and approval.
Our engineering resources can evaluate drawings, review assembly lines, perform product teardowns, and identify part-consolidation opportunities. Assembly line reviews include recommendations, cost analysis, and performance comparisons. That gives purchasing and engineering something concrete to evaluate together.
Our data-driven vendor-managed inventory programs use consumption patterns to help adjust stock levels. Depending on your operation, options include bin stocking, point-of-use inventory, and staffed in-plant stores. Programs can support multiple locations and are tailored to the requirements of each facility.
Field also sources through a global supplier network. Together, these capabilities create opportunities to review the part, the supply arrangement, and the work surrounding it.
A VMI transition should spell out who owns replenishment, how inventory will be set up, and how performance will be reported. With Field, programs include agreed-upon performance measures and regular reviews. Proposed engineering changes need testing and approval before implementation.
Keep the benefits clear: hours returned create capacity; hard savings require an expense to be removed. Inventory cash released is a separate benefit from recurring financing or storage savings.
This example is hypothetical, not a Field customer result.
Assumptions: Annual demand is 100,000 parts; both options are approved for the application; production volume stays the same. Freight and duties are additional to quoted prices. The listed expense reductions are achievable and verified, with unchanged overhead and regular wages excluded.
|
Annual cost |
Supplier A |
Supplier B |
|
Parts at $0.08 / $0.09 each |
$8,000 |
$9,000 |
|
Additional freight and duties |
$1,000 |
$800 |
|
Avoidable inventory financing and storage |
$600 |
$400 |
|
Assembly overtime attributable to this part |
$2,400 |
$1,600 |
|
Expedite charges and replacement materials, excluding costs above |
$1,200 |
$300 |
|
Total recurring annual expense |
$13,200 |
$12,100 |
Supplier B’s parts cost $1,000 more, but its recurring annual expense is $1,100 lower. A $500 one-time testing and setup cost would reduce the first-year net benefit to $600.
Purchasing capacity and inventory cash released would be reported separately. Your records may favor either supplier; the goal is a comparison your team can support.
The lowest-priced fastener isn’t always the lowest-cost fastener.
There are better ways to save. The right supplier should help you find where those opportunities exist and determine which changes make sense for your operation.
Have a part family or fastener spend category under review? Talk with Field about the parts, your purchasing history, and the problem you want to solve. Together, we can discuss the right scope and information needed to build the comparison.