PAYMENT OF SUPPLY. WHAT IS BETTER: A DELAY IN PAYMENT OR PAYMENT AS THE SALE?

Traditionally, when delivering goods on credit, managers of companies deliver goods depending on whether they are talking about delivery of goods under the conditions of “100% payment for the delivered goods within 100% of the date of delivery”. So, what is the reason for such perseverance in the requirements of 100% payment for all previously delivered goods. it’s easier to find: one delivery, one payment; so it is easier for the manager: there are no “visies”, there is no need to think about the turnover of the goods; so easier logistics: once brought, not paid – no luck. So “simpler” is a universal excuse. What is behind it?

Logistics Investing in the purchase (production) of the assortment of any investor requires him to report that goods from the linear assortment are sold non-dimensionally: due to consumer preferences (5 colors of nail polish from 60 shades), differing in delivery time (shampoo for hair) the product should be completely changed, etc. there is no equality in terms of the turnover of funds invested in the product. The investor understands that the profits from the units of different types are also different, and often low returns are compensated for by the high profits from the units. It’s like a fabulous one, and investors want in any case to secure access to these inbound goods, which are sold with a few late goods.

All products must be present in the warehouse and on each trading platform, and all that happens is that some of the names are crowded, with a shortage of others. It is generally profitable for the production, or the purchasing department, to buy everything in the same way: accounting, control and reporting are simpler. Replenishing, or purchasing, supplementing them is not convenient or profitable. It is by these rules that salespeople are forced to play. They must be ready to deliver the goods on the terms “100% payment at the end of the period”. Retail logo To begin with, in order not to write a clear “commodity product, not running, hanging”, let’s classify the entire range by ABC analysis: “A” is a scarce (often) high-quality product; “B” – goods evenly paid for during the entire delivery period – before payment; “C” is a product range that is delayed for various reasons; “D” is a frank “visyak” (goods with low market indicators), delivered “out of habit”, due to the lack of a substitute product, but copied from the warehouse and subject to sale.

Now we present the following delivery logic – the sale of a consignment of goods: a consignment of goods is provided for the 1st month, with a 100% payment of 31 numbers for the entire delivered volume. 1st number – delivery “A” + “B” + “C” + “D” 10 number “A” – the deficit from “A” was sold; “B” – sold 30%; “C” – 20% sold “D” – 10% sold 15 number “A” – sold “A” 100% “B” – 50% sold; “C” – 30% sold “D” – 15% sold 20 The number is already 10 days no shortage, 5 days no “A”, Against the background of the absence of “A”, sales of “B” slowed down. “A” – 0; “B” – only 60% sold; “C” – 35% sold; “D” -sold 17%; 30 number “A” – 0; “B” – only 70% sold; “C” – 40% sold; “D” -sold 20%; The picture on the 30th from the date of delivery is truly depressing. The difference in trademarks is more balanced, and the range may be somewhat better. However, this does not cancel what was said: 30 numbers of retails simply cannot afford to pay all 100% of the goods delivered on credit.

The solution to an imminent conflict is the return of unsold goods, or the prolongation of the due date. Attempts to rectify the situation However, in this situation it was possible to assume that at the time of delivery the delivery was formed so that the assortment “A” would be present on the counter as long as possible. To do this, it is necessary to provide for the supply of goods in groups “A” in the morning quantities, but this is also inevitable in order to move the debate and overstock of the retail warehouse. The implementation of the contract is carried out throughout the term, but under the terms of the contract. Yes, and it is most likely that he will not be able to explain reasonably the need for additional payment of the goods in case of outstanding debts of the manager.

The delivery of the popular goods from the group “A” And yet the additional delivery is quite logical. Despite the increased costs of logistics, we get the stability of turnover with rising sales. Causes: we constantly control the balance – we can quickly influence the turnover (additional delivery, marketing actions, return of goods, price management); the presence of the undercarriage goods of group “A” tightens the sales of the assortment from group “B”, “C”; we reduce the receivables (do not overstock the warehouse of the reteyn with the goods “A” – just in case); and sell goods from group “A” zanchitelno more, due to regular pre-delivery.

The store draws with payment. It is also interesting that the delayed payment agreement allows the store to have a formal debt to the supplier and legally enforceable under the supply contract for the entire period from delivery to contractual payment deadline. And the longer the product is given, the more and for a longer period retail has a loan from the supplier (subject to the prompt sale of the goods “A” and “B”). And realizing that the supplier still doesn’t bring a new batch of goods before the due date, the store has to change its attitude to the goods and the supplier, henceforth considering the supply contract as a lending operation.

Payment as it is implemented Salvation for both parties (provided that they are interested in selling the goods) is other conditions of payment for the goods delivered. As a rule, in the supply contract these conditions are fixed as: “delivery of goods with payment for the goods sold”. Understanding that the goods will be sold daily and that it is not reasonable and costly to pay for the goods sold daily, these conditions are specified: “delivery of goods with payment for the goods sold every 10 days, with final settlement and the possibility of returning the goods not sold at the end of the sale period “. Thus, the supplier has the ability to control commodity balances and withdraw revenue. Delivery of goods Having dealt with the control of what the store successfully sells, and when you can get money for the goods sold earlier, it remains to figure out how to get the full amount of goods for group A without retailing for the goods delivered earlier.

If you think that the shop is interested in concluding a supply agreement not in credit money, but in your product, and it actually regularly pays the sold goods of group “A”, then there is nothing more logical than to add to it this very product for the next payment period . And how many goods the “A” store sold, for so much from the sold goods the store transferred money, the same quantity of goods “A” and it is necessary to add.

If you accurately determine by classification what retail group the specific store belongs to in terms of turnover and have statistics on the sales of product “A” for this group of retail, then it can be almost unmistakable how much money you need to add product “A” on 10, 20, 30 days from the date delivery. This amount, for which it is permissible to add goods, can be entered into the contract by correlating it with another amount – the amount of payments made by the sold goods: “during the period before the final payment, the supplier makes an additional delivery of goods for an amount not exceeding the previously paid goods sold by the store”. Credit line What about the goods not sold at the end of the implementation period?

As said earlier, the goods can be returned to the supplier. However, most likely, the goods of group “D” and partly of groups “C” and “B” will have to be returned, which is not beneficial for the supplier. As a rule, the supplier, knowing the probability of selling this product even if it is longer than the period specified in the contract, prefers to leave the product in the store. In this case, the so-called carry-over balance of goods, which remains in the store, is determined.

Above the regulatory surplus is returned to the supplier. Thus, the parties define such a remaining product as a credit allowed for the prolongation. And if batches of goods are delivered on a regular basis, then the parties determine the so-called credit line – the amount and the period for which the goods not previously sold remain in the store, regularly, from batch to batch. Something instead of a withdrawal By using all the above-mentioned tools for supplying and paying for goods, the supplier seeks for a controlled sale of goods from retail shelves, the ability to manage the assortment on the shelves, reduces accounts receivable, and saves retail from having to re-stock a warehouse with its goods. Everything is perfect, it remains only to introduce a program to stimulate purchases of their own goods by the store buyer.