01 · Situation
Customers in the East. Inventory in the West.
Close to 40% of revenue came from East Coast customers. Every order still shipped from California. For large, heavy products, that meant long transit times, high freight costs, and more chances for damage along the way.
- East Coast deliveries took days longer than customers expected
- Outbound freight was one of the largest costs in the operation
- The West Coast warehouse was running out of room
- Nobody had a clean, current view of what freight actually cost by lane
02 · What we did
Frame it first. Then let the data decide.
- Set the goal before the vendors. We framed the decision around cost and speed, with warehouse space as a second benefit, so every option was judged the same way.
- Built a real baseline. A rolling year of freight invoices, line by line, showed where orders went and what each lane cost.
- Mapped the demand. A heat map of East Coast orders pointed to one location in the Southeast that could reach most customers in a day or two.
- Kept the scope tight. One East Coast site, outbound only, for the top product line. Returns, quality checks, and repairs stayed in California.
- Scored the field. Twelve fulfillment partners were scored on eleven weighted criteria, and inbound freight costs were benchmarked across 56 cities.
- Ran a formal RFx. The top candidates priced the same scope, and we compared rail and ocean routes for getting product to the East.
- Built the go/no-go. A decision deck for the CFO and board laid out the savings, the speed gain, the risks, and the timing.
How the field narrowed
- 12Candidates scored on 11 weighted criteria, from big-and-bulky handling to Southeast reach
- 4Live bids priced on the same scope through a formal RFx
- 1Leading option, about $200 saved per order and 1 to 2 days faster
A choice that mattered: cost was kept out of the capability score and shown beside it. That way price and quality were weighed in the open, not blended into one number.
03 · The outcome
A clear return, and a clear call to wait.
The leading option showed about $340K a year in projected benefit, roughly $200 saved per order, and delivery one to two days faster than shipping from the West Coast.
The board saw the return and chose not to pursue it for now. A full facility move was about to begin, and taking on both at once would have stretched the team. That was the right call, and it was made with real numbers instead of a guess.
Good analysis doesn’t always end in “go.” Sometimes its job is to show leadership exactly what they’re choosing, and when.
The case is built. It’s ready when they are.
04 · Where else it works
Any network decision that’s been running on instinct.
The same approach fits second-warehouse decisions, 3PL selection, carrier bids, and any choice where freight, speed, and space pull in different directions.