Quoting Method Madness

The quoting methods in the stamping industry are a blend of black magic and bullshit.

You have your good old fashioned Sight Method. That is where someone looks at the part and says, “That is a $250,000 die right there.” How the fuck do they know that? “Experience.”

Then, there is the Length-of-Line Method. You know that one. Measure some trim lines, a few form break lines, then multiply some random number to the length to get your quote. Now, if only you were selling line measurement services instead of stamping dies …

Next up on the list of fancy quoting tools is The Matrix. This works alot like an Ouiji Board. Find the row that has your blank area dimension, then find the column that has the number of stations. It points you to the price. You can almost hear some dead estimator whisper the price to you from the die graveyard.

My favorite is the BOM Method. This is the Bill-of-Materials-thing-a-ma-jig that bases the quote on a standard stocklist of items found in a tool. A guide pin here. A spring there. Keep in mind that the component prices are someone’s best guess and not real numbers. The theory is if you know the component costs, you can creatively guess at the cost of the tool. Somehow.

Here is where all these methods suck: The customer says your price is 30% too high. How could they know that? Using the above methods, you don’t even know if you are high, low, or somewhere in between.

Wouldn’t it be nice to go back to the customer with a rational breakdown to show them that your price is 5% above cost and there is no room to take out another 25% if they buy it at cost?

I would really like to see companies that are looking for a quote to build a die to stop asking for dollars and cents and start asking for hours and pounds.

Why?

Because the cost drivers in any die are machine hours and material pounds. It is that simple. Everything else has a direct relationship to machine time and material weight.

Estimate the 2D and 3D machine time (including wire and sink EDM, of course) and the amount of material required to get the job done, and you will be able to determine the real cost and prove that cost to the folks that think they can put the “your prices are too high” gun to your head.

Alltop. Seriously?! I got in?

3 comments

  1. Totally agree that the prime cost drivers are the man hours and machine hours, and bulk material.

    But at the core of the problem is not the method used to arrive at a NUMBER. BOM, Length of Line, and Even the Ouija board have some merit, since after all we need to predict an uncertain future. How one comes up with the hours of machine time and mass of material when all they have is part data, and only a guess at the process.

    Isn’t it CORE to this issue that we confuse the COST with the PRICE? I’ve been running into similar issues regarding our Cost Calculator. Your colleague Jerry Q. and i had a great conversation when we demoed our CostCalculator product and he kept stating that we could not Sell the die at that price, when we agreed for the most part that the hours and the materials may well be in the right ball park.

    I have even considered branding it a “LossCalculator” so that when the cost and the price are not in agreement you know the difference is most likely a loss.

  2. Stephens

    hi Eric,

    To price / cost the die, you must have A process to quote to.

    Period.

    I agree on all methods have merit … it is like religion or politics – all are partially right but not a single one is completely right.

    Regarding the issue with cost and price – price represents market conditions if you are selling above or below the so-called cost number.

    Thanks for reading … I will be posting more on this topic and just might give away a functional version of what I am talking about – something that can be “calibrated” in about 5 minutes.

  3. check with Bob Quinn at RCM he has a project underway for something like that too, with some Government funding for Tool and Die revival in Michigan.

    http://www.toolanddiefutures.org

Leave a Reply