We have 11 but now that backroom can absolutely NO LONGER help us WHATSOEVER with our freight and receiving backstock we're still short staffed.
You're not going to replace 3 case trucks with 3 watches model trucks. I'd say most trucks I saw at our store were $150-180K. Anyway. Instead of sending 150k in case packs to one store, one truck may split the truck a number of ways (50:25:25, thirds, half, etc) to fill wasted space. The touches decreases in that instead of taking freight into DC > warehouse> pick and label > load > unload > push. THEN > backstock if needed > pull > push. In that scenario you're close to ten touches. Strictly talking touches, if you look at DC > (warehouse) > breakdown > load > unload > push, it's a similar count. The difference is loading racks instead of cases, so by rolling it right off the truck there no unload teams needed. Roll right off the truck and park for working as TMs come in.
Throwing out estimates we don't have access to is a rough way to go at it and criticize spot so blatantly. Until you have concrete numbers there's just things we can't account for. overhead, operational costs, labor, anything from the freight getting to DC then to the store is mostly unknown at store level.
The DC handling makes or breaks the process, it's value added for stores to not have all the backroom nonsense. Those 150-300 hours for backroom can be shifted to the floor (mostly).
And at this point I feel like we're all just speculating on this......I strayed from the point I may have had....
The most disturbing thing I saw when I first arrived at Target was a hand packed truck. I had not seen one in over twenty years. I thought everyone had moved onto knockdowns, reusable containers (not cardboard boxes), or some other reusable dunnage within their logistics chains. Then I ran into system where case quantities were ignored. I could not believe it.
I spent over twenty years working with IE's (Industrial Engineers) who engineered logistics processes. I've been involved in good ones and bad ones.
I've managed freight in a JIT environment to managing multi link supply chains across borders.
I can say without hesitation that Target had a very good inventory system at one time. However, for what ever reason, it's been allowed to fall into a state of decay. We are truly behind our competition. The more I learn and research about this topic, the more I wonder what Spot's been doing the past five years. If you were in my shoes you would see it to. It's rather disturbing.
So when I point out things, it come from experience of being on the successful side and on the side that experiences the ultimate failure. Once you experience the latter, you know what it looks like before it even get there.
Don't take what I say or anyone else for that matter as being hyper critical of Spot. Just concerned about heading in the wrong direction that's all.
I'm looking at the total value per truck on average. So if you where to replenish in the current model, your splitting a truck, in this case three ways, you would loose 234K/per week based upon sales value capacity.
I suspect it would be the same to ratio in regards to piece per piece rate, sales value would drop given the lack of additional freight volume per store.
Contrary to what you may think I understand E2E and "eaches".
However, they are dependent upon one another based upon Mr. Valdez's explanations.
You could not possibly run a E2E process efficiently with our current logistics process, you would literally swamp the boat with a the truck process. Something that a lot of us are experiencing right now. Too much to process at one time with all of the additional requirements.
E2E tightens everything up by allowing more team members to physically manage an area. In other words, your inventory cycles are more true and accurate given that you can physically maintain the system at all times. This where the "eaches" make this possible. Your dealing with more manageable incoming merchandise already set to go to an area. Your stream lining the truck process.
However, this will come at a cost given that your adding more touches inside your supply chain when you break case pack quantities.
That being said, you're able to better control incoming inventory. That's one of the upsides to E2E.
Like I mentioned earlier, we are in a stop gap mode. We just don't have capacity to fulfill on line orders without store support. The reason that a store like I'm in just received notice that we going to a 1K/day order rate. A UPS pup will be backed up in the center bay come 4th Qtr.
Mr. Valdez most likely picked up on this rather quickly upon his first analysis. I know I did when I researched the topic.
He looked at every available option upon arrival so that he could quickly turn things around in short order until we can catch up.
We can fulfill quite a few online orders at our Online DC operations, but not enough to keep pace with the demand and our competitions ability at this time. That's where the other side of the business comes in, to make up the difference where we can. It's not profitable enough to continue it long term from what I have learned.
It's basically our only solution at this time to keep pace with the demand of online orders.
We can't be in position where SFS does substantial amount of that business long term and remain profitable. Too much SFS volume will drag margins down significantly due to the burden created by shipping from the stores inventory.
I think Rock Lobster start as a TM and worked himself up to ETL.
Some Flow TMs will need to ask to move to the new teams.
