The Economics of Foodservice Distribution
Originally Published in the Cheese Reporter

 

For many years the contention between foodservice manufacturers and distributors has grown. The clear recognition that each needs the other keeps diplomacy in the relationship, but the fact remains that these two channel partners are at cross-purposes from time to time. Each side is in a battle with the other for the last two to four percentage points. Part of the solution is education. Understanding the economics is one way to comprehend each other.

There are thousands of distributors in the market; some are very large and some quite the opposite. The pace of mergers and acquisitions over the past 10 years has created a void in the middle. The dominant local distributor in the $50 - $100 million range has come under great pressure. Not nimble enough to fend off the small competitor and lacking resources to take on the giants, many have chosen to be acquired.

At its core, foodservice distribution is about creating and managing gross profit. The margins in distribution have shrunk continuously since the 70's. Where once 25% margins were commonplace, that number has continued to come down to the 16-18% level. Costs have increased and this is why the "middle market" distributors have become takeover targets. Many distributors are earning 16-18% gross profit and running a 14-16% cost of operation. Net profits of 1-2% are routine. This is not an enormous return on investment in view of the tremendous liabilities of trucking and the huge credit risk that most distributors take. It's no wonder they are battling it out with manufacturers for a few extra percentage points.

The cost of operations is typically broken into four categories, cost of sales, administration, warehousing and delivery. Remarkably the four are fairly even in their overall contribution. Managing costs without affecting service is an increasing challenge. One way the distributor can gain efficiency is by reduction of duplicated or substitute items. Fewer items to sell simplifies the sales function, reduces the SKU's that need to be purchased and eases accounting. It also keeps pressure off warehousing and slotting, meaning less need for increasing warehouse sizes. Delivery and picking errors are also reduced. This tactic for distributors reduces costs but makes it harder for manufacturers to market new items and build brands. The distributor will bend these requirements in the face of aggressive marketing programs, once again, decreasing the profitability of producers in order to solve the distributor's problems.

Superior investments in technology can reduce a distributors cost of operation. To gain profitability, they must sell more value-added products with higher profit margins and find ways to create additional income. Marketing programs have become the key drivers for this additional income. This is the open wound between manufacturers and distributors. Distributors see their very survival tied to the ability to bring additional dollars to the bottom line by tapping manufacturers for marketing and merchandising funds. Some of these programs offer great benefits for the manufacturer; others are simply naked grabs for money with little return.

Because manufacturers have been burned, they are wary of blanket participation. This is ironically a key to the long-term survival of both channel partners. Manufacturers simply cannot participate in every distributor's marketing program; profits in a market will not support it. They must choose their channel partners and improve their backing while limiting distribution points. The more widely distributed commodities a distributor sells, the more vulnerable they become to margin squeeze. Manufacturers can assist by creating superior value-added products and limiting distribution so that distributors can maintain a healthy margin.

Consolidation among the foodservice buying/marketing groups is a reflection of this "middle drain" as well. The groups continue to merge and blur the private-label, control-label business. Fewer groups offering multiple labels complicate inventory management for producers. In addition, the growing purchasing power of these groups is increasing the program demands on manufacturers. The groups each have their own philosophy concerning the collection and distribution of marketing dollars. At the end of the day, distributors join groups because they believe they can gain profitability and value-added service from these buying/marketing groups.

The marketing benefits of nationally advertised labels are also important to the independent distributor competing against the national corporate distributors. The advertising and marketing benefit created by the group label outshines their ability to create a label on their own. Distributor private label products are decreasing. This is actually good for both manufacturers and distributors. Manufactures cannot continue to support weak and slow moving labels. Distributors are not getting the mileage out of private label programs due to their lower margin.

What functions do foodservice distributors perform? Simplistically, they buy in bulk, offer bulk break services, deliver a wide range of goods in small quantities and extend credit to an industry well known to be a high credit risk. For this, they receive an ROI that is low but commensurate with the market. So why do distributors operate? Many of these companies could liquidate their assets and achieve better returns in lower risk investments. Distributors distribute food products because they have a passion for the business. But the reality is that distributors are under enormous pressure.

The bottom line is that the foodservice distributor is deeply in need of the income generated from their internal marketing methods and those of their buying/marketing group. Manufactures must continue to take responsibility for marketing their products through the channel. They must also bear the cost of the channel through the distributor. Operators are reluctant to raise prices; therefore, they put pressure on the distributor. The distributor has nowhere else to turn but the manufacturer. This pattern has created the issues. Manufactures who market higher benefits to operators can increase their margin and offer superior marketing programs; witness Grande Cheese. Distributors with superior service and technology can outclass the competition and increase their margin. The point is that both sides must stop aiming at each other and focus on building value rather than fighting over two percentage points.

Ed Zimmerman