Fehlentscheidungen durch ungenaue Verkaufs- und Preisdaten

Definition

Understanding alcohol sales by beverage type and channel in Australia relies on accurate wholesale data.[5] For many wholesalers, price posting, rebates and promotional contributions are maintained outside core systems, making it difficult to reconcile invoiced prices with list prices, discounts and compliance constraints by state. Without clean data, management over‑ or under‑invests in certain SKUs or channels, for example continuing deep discounts on products that are already constrained by MUP or local price‑promotion rules, or failing to support higher‑margin lines in unconstrained channels. Industry research on trade promotion effectiveness in FMCG commonly identifies 10–20% of trade spend as ineffective, with automation and analytics recovering a meaningful portion. Adapting these benchmarks conservatively to liquor wholesaling suggests that 1–3% of net revenue poured into mis‑targeted discounts and ineffective promotions can be attributed to poor data quality and compliance‑driven blind spots. For a wholesaler with AUD 150m in revenue and trade spend of 15% of sales (AUD 22.5m), a 1–3% revenue impact is approximately AUD 1.5–4.5m in sub‑optimal margin contribution each year.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Australian 🇦🇺 alcohol wholesalers that rely on manual spreadsheets for price posting and compliance reporting typically misallocate 1–3% of trade spend. Integrating wholesale sales, price and compliance data into one system redirects this spend to profitable, compliant growth.

Affected Stakeholders

CEO, Chief Commercial Officer, Head of Sales, Revenue Management Lead, Category Manager

Related Business Risks