Fehlentscheidungen durch fehlende Werkzeug-Transparenz

Definition

Australian tooling manufacturers stress that precision dies and moulds are high-value assets and major contributors to product cost structures in plastics, die casting and packaging.[1][4][5][6][7] However, many plants do not integrate detailed tooling cost and lifecycle information into their ERP or quoting tools. When the true maintenance burden and amortisation of a complex die set is not visible, sales teams may quote prices based only on material and machine time, ignoring upcoming tool refurbishment or replacement. This leads to underpricing, especially on long-term contracts where a tool will need major overhaul in mid-life. Conversely, the lack of accurate utilisation data per die can cause engineering to request new tooling capex when latent capacity exists in under-used tools, tying up additional capital unnecessarily. Tool monitoring providers highlight that real-time insights into tool and mold utilisation are necessary to reveal hidden waste and support better decisions on investments and scheduling.[3] As a logic-based quantification, if 5–10% of SKUs in a mid-sized packaging plant are mispriced due to unaccounted tooling costs, and these SKUs represent AUD 5–10m of revenue at 10–15% target margin, a 2–3 percentage point margin erosion equates to AUD 100,000–300,000 in lost EBIT per year. Additional misallocated capex on avoidable new tools can add AUD 50,000–200,000 annually.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Without visibility into die and tooling performance, Australian 🇦🇺 packaging firms misprice work and overinvest in tools, sacrificing 1–3% EBIT margin. Digitising tooling data at quote and production time protects margin on every custom job.

Affected Stakeholders

Sales director, Commercial manager, CFO, Financial controller, Engineering manager, Product manager

Related Business Risks