The supplier minimums were writing the purchase order.
A planning tool was already in place. The question was whether it should be trusted alone. We ran the manual plan alongside it, logged every sync, and put a dollar figure on inventory the client had only ever counted in units.
Real demand, and what was actually ordered.
Across 37 order lines, minimums more than doubled the commitment. The minimum is the supplier's rule, not a client mistake. Nobody had ever added it up.
Four nodes, 19 origins, 14 suppliers.
Every lane between them carries its own measured lead time, so a transfer is planned on the real number rather than one blanket figure.
On hand, with $53,605.18 on order, across four nodes and 63 products. FBA $79,747.66, AWD $37,330.16, Ohio $26,789.22, Washington nil.
A lead-time matrix covering 15 suppliers and 4 warehouse nodes feeding a transfer network. Supplier to AWD 45 days. AWD to FBA, AWD to Ohio and Ohio to FBA all 14 days. One supplier lane runs 90.
Minimum order quantity, production lead time and unit cost modelled for each, then the obvious question answered: reordering every mapped SKU at exactly its minimum costs $101,160.75.
Error rows, across 79 inbound shipments, 231 order lines and 122,263 units reconciled between the working sheet and the client's planning system.
If the forecast says one quantity and the PO says another, price the constraint.
Bring the SKU whose minimum never fits the forecast. We will work through what the supplier rules add to the buy.