The factory ran at a loss, demanding constant subsidies. Turns out: the money was on the shelves.
×3smaller inventory by volume and value
IndustryManufacturing, complex product range
Revenue≈€6M
FormatProject and retainer
TeamPartner, ERP lead, accountant
Situation
Manufacturing company, ≈€6M revenue. The factory ran at a loss, needed constant cash injections from the owner, the warehouse was frozen with material, the books spread across a dozen disconnected programs. Each finished product carried ~70 SKU components. The request sounded like «we need to automate». But automation is a tool, not a diagnosis. We had to understand why a product profitable by revenue was eating the owner's money.
What we found and did
- Procurement was deliberately over-bought, to «optimise VAT». Tax savings cost real working capital
- Consolidated ten disconnected programs into a single accounting product
- Rebuilt purchasing logic: from «buy more» to «buy what you need»
- Built production and procurement planning tailored to the plant
- Set up an SKU-level report: stock + confirmed-order demand + on-order, as basis for decisions
Result
Warehouse×3 smaller by volume and money
Working capitalBack in operation
OwnerProfit distributions instead of subsidies
Dead stockAlmost zero: recycled or scrapped
Number of programsFrom ten to a working minimum
A large warehouse isn't reserve safety or a tax win. It's company capital that has stopped working.
A 42.finance principle