Is It Appropriate for the Rack Manufacturer to Undertake the Four-way Dense Warehouse Project?
As the cost of industrial land keep rising, coupled with the increasing cost of employment, enterprises require intelligent warehouses, maximum storage capacity, automation (unmanned), and information technology. Four-way shuttle dense warehouses are becoming the mainstream form of intelligent warehousing due to their flexibility in storage density, storage categories, and storage efficiency.
Racks, as the most basic, common and largest shipment product in the warehousing and logistics industry, make it easier for rack manufacturers to obtain requirement information for four-way dense warehouses. In addition, racks account for a considerable proportion in four-way intensive warehouses. Rack manufacturer owners tend to believe that intelligent systems have high profits, and they are already overwhelmed by loaning from system integrator for rack. Therefore, some rack manufacturer owners began to undertake intelligent warehouse projects by themselves, taking charge of the rack part themselves and outsourcing other systems.
So is it really appropriate for the rack manufacturer to undertake the four-way dense warehouse project? Let"s talk about the disadvantages!
1.Main business: Every profession has its own specialty. The four-way dense shuttle warehouse project is not the main business of the rack manufacturer. Less energy and research have been invested in it. In the era of involution in every industry, it is even more impossible to make money beyond one"s ability.
2.Technology: The rack manufacturer only has technical personnel for the rack part, and no professionals related to the intelligent warehouse. The early communication and solution design require the assistance of other partners. Since it is usually the rack manufacturer’ salesperson contacts the end customer, so deviations are inevitable when the information is conveyed, causing disputes during the later construction and acceptance. In addition, the rack manufacturer does not have a unified standard specification for the entire system. If a problem is encountered during the implementation process, it is impossible to determine which party is responsible, and there is a risk of passing the buck.
3.Price: When competing for four-way dense warehouse projects, rack manufacturers often adopt a low-price strategy because they are not qualified enough. Once they get the project, they will reversely control the procurement cost and subcontract to some less professional manufacturers or individuals at ultra-low prices. Whether it is the equipment or technology, it will be greatly discounted, and it is difficult to control the reliability of the project from the system perspective.
4.Competition: As a supplier of system integrator, rack manufacturers provide system integrator with various automated racks on the one hand, and compete with system integrator for intelligent warehouse projects on the other hand. Conflicts are bound to arise between them, causing the previous integrator customers to re-select supporting rack manufacturers .
5.Implementation: The implementation of intelligent warehouses often adopts project management system. The project manager coordinates and plans the implementation progress of the entire project, and handles some emergencies that may occur at any time. The rack manufacturer does not have a similar qualified project manager, and the implementation process may be often a mess, with chaotic procedures and frequent rework. It is hard to determine who is at fault when encountering problems, which leads to delays in construction progress and additional expenses for the user. Once the user is angry and improper handling by the rack manufacturer, it often leads to conflicts among the implementation teams of all parties, and the breakdown of cooperation, resulting in inherent deficiencies in the project or the final failure.
6.After-sales service: A complete intelligent system cannot be without after-sales service. The rack manufacturer implements the project basically by relying on a temporary external team, not a long-term partner. Once the project is over, all parties will also disband. If time is a little longer, once you encounter after-sales problems, you may not even be able to find the previous implementation personnel, let alone the technical information related to the project. The project is used with inconveniences, and in a few years it will face huge project transformation (transformation projects are more difficult than implementing a new project).
In summary, we recommend that users carefully consider the following points when selecting a supplier: Does the supplier have its own core equipment and core technology? Does the supplier have its own technical standard system and implementation team? Does the supplier have the ability to implement and control the entire project? Does the supplier have multiple self-completed and accepted projects?
