BRG Sports wondered whether reducing its number of distribution centers would let it cut costs but still improve customer service. The company conducted a software analysis to find out.
When companies grow through mergers and acquisitions, they inherit a network of plants and distribution centers (DCs). Although the plant and DC locations may have made sense for the original businesses, they may not provide an efficient supply chain flow for the amalgamated enterprise.
That was the case for BRG Sports Inc. (formerly Easton-Bell Sports Inc.), which ended up with a network of a dozen distribution centers when Easton-Bell was formed through the merger of two sports equipment companies.
Four years after that merger, the sports equipment manufacturer decided to analyze its network and develop a plan for a more streamlined supply chain. It seemed likely that the company could reduce costs by rationalizing the number of DCs in its network, but could it do so and improve customer service at the same time? After a yearlong, software-based analysis of its network, BRG found that it could achieve that objective if it redesigned its distribution network around a primary DC located in the center of the United States.
A cumbersome network
The forerunner of BRG Sports, Easton-Bell Sports Inc., was created in 2006 with the merger of two companies, Riddell Bell Holdings and Easton Sports. Featured brands back then were Riddell football helmets and protective equipment, Bell bicycle and "power sports" helmets, and Easton baseball and softball equipment. In 2014 Easton-Bell became BRG Sports when it divested itself of the Easton businesses. That move also resulted in a shift in its headquarters from Van Nuys, California, to Scotts Valley in the northern part of that state. Today, BRG Sports retains the Bell, Riddell, Blackburn, and Giro brands, focusing on action sports and football helmets, protective gear, apparel, and accessories.
Back in 2010, executives at Easton-Bell began to wonder whether the supply chain network resulting from the merger of Riddell Bell and Easton Sports was too cumbersome. At that time Easton-Bell operated 12 distribution centers throughout the United States to serve its customers, which ranged from large retailers like Wal-Mart Stores and Dick's Sporting Goods to small specialty bicycle shops. It also had a growing e-commerce business that sold products online and shipped them direct to the consumer's door. "There was a lot of duplication in our logistics network," says Lewis Hornsby, vice president of global logistics and fulfillment and general manager of BRG Sports' Rantoul, Illinois, operations.
In addition to manufacturing sports equipment in two plants in the United States, one in Illinois and the other in Ohio, the company imported a large portion of its products from overseas. Most of the imported goods were sourced from Asia, primarily from China, Taiwan, and the Philippines.
With such a far-flung supply and customer base, the question before Easton-Bell was this: Could it lower costs and improve customer service with fewer DCs? To arrive at an answer, the company engaged Atlanta-based Competitive Insights Inc., which provides analytics as part of its cloud-based integrated business planning solutions.
A year's worth of data
Competitive Insights began the project by creating a financial picture of Easton-Bell's current supply chain flows. It developed a cost baseline by gathering data from all three Easton-Bell business units at that time (Easton baseball, Riddell football helmets, and Bell cycling and helmets) over a period of one year. Taking a one-year "snapshot" of activity ensured that the model incorporated all of the network's "ebbs and flows and seasonality," Hornsby says.
The information gathered for the analysis included the costs of inbound shipping, both domestic and international, as well as the costs for outbound deliveries, plus data on manufacturing and labor expenses for operating a plant or DC in each area of the country. The analysis even included such costs as electricity, property taxes, and facility maintenance. "The analysis ran the gamut of everything that had a material impact on the supply chain's costs of doing business," Hornsby recalls.
Most of the cost data came from the company's SAP enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. Analysts also pulled some data on transportation costs from a transportation management system (TMS) and got some inbound cost data from the company's freight forwarder.
Once the analysis had painted a cost picture of the current operation, Easton-Bell and Competitive Insights began examining various scenarios to determine the impact of a different supply chain makeup on operating costs and customer service. The analysis also took into account the impact of a network change on key customers like Wal-Mart Stores. After considering more than 20 different scenarios, the analysis determined that Easton-Bell should operate just one main distribution center somewhere in the middle of the United States.
The modeling exercise also indicated that the company should build an entirely new facility rather than repurpose or expand an existing one. "The majority of our facilities were old and somewhat antiquated," Hornsby explains. "We were competing with 25 or 30 competitors that could take and ship orders faster than we were. We had to step up our game, and this was the way to do it."
Texas or Illinois?
As for where to locate the new DC, the company was faced with a choice: It could either establish a new facility in Dallas, Texas, or in Rantoul, Illinois, where it already had a plant that made bicycle helmets and full-size collectible football helmets. Although the analysis indicated that the Texas location offered lower overall costs, the company made a decision to build the new DC in Rantoul in order to hold onto experienced employees who had specific knowledge in core areas, including manufacturing. "Expertise was the key," explains Hornsby. "We had 350 employees [in Rantoul] with an average of 17 years of experience apiece. When we made the announcement about where we were going to build and I was asked why, I said there were 350 reasons why we should build in Rantoul."
In August of 2012, Easton-Bell broke ground on a new 800,000-square-foot facility in Rantoul; construction was completed 14 months later. The new building was designed to support a product flow with supplies received at one end of the building and merchandise shipped out at the other. According to Hornsby, the new DC can hold about 44,500 pallet positions and thousands of stock-keeping units (SKUs). Although receiving is handled manually, the DC takes advantage of automated equipment to facilitate and speed the picking, packing, and shipping of orders.
The network consolidation will enable BRG to improve transit times, minimize duplication in the supply chain, and reduce costs. For example, the Illinois location allows the sports equipment maker to avoid the longer transit times associated with all-water shipments from its Asian suppliers to the U.S. East Coast. Now it unloads cargo on the West Coast and moves it via intermodal rail to Rantoul. And by serving most of its customers from one central location, BRG will be able to get better rates on outbound shipping as well.
All of these changes have an impact on service. "There was a huge customer service benefit," Hornsby says. "By shipping out of the central part of the [United States], you can reach 95 percent of the country with ground or normal transportation within two to three days."
Although the software analysis suggested that a single distribution center would minimize costs while maximizing service benefits, BRG decided to retain a second facility. In addition to the new DC in Rantoul, the company is keeping a smaller distribution center at its Elyria, Ohio, plant, which makes football helmets.
Complete data is critical
What advice would Hornsby offer to others who are considering a similar project? The BRG supply chain executive said companies should make sure they have a wide-enough range of data to capture any seasonality. He noted that when Easton baseball products were part of the company's portfolio, there were sales spikes during the spring and fall. These sales spikes had to be taken into account to get an accurate picture of the company's distribution network needs.
Hornsby's second piece of advice would be to make certain that the financial model encompasses all cost factors, from property taxes to snow removal, associated with every facility. "Don't scrimp on the data range," he recommends, "and be sure to capture every cost you can imagine."
Just 29% of supply chain organizations have the competitive characteristics they’ll need for future readiness, according to a Gartner survey released Tuesday. The survey focused on how organizations are preparing for future challenges and to keep their supply chains competitive.
Gartner surveyed 579 supply chain practitioners to determine the capabilities needed to manage the “future drivers of influence” on supply chains, which include artificial intelligence (AI) achievement and the ability to navigate new trade policies. According to the survey, the five competitive characteristics are: agility, resilience, regionalization, integrated ecosystems, and integrated enterprise strategy.
The survey analysis identified “leaders” among the respondents as supply chain organizations that have already developed at least three of the five competitive characteristics necessary to address the top five drivers of supply chain’s future.
Less than a third have met that threshold.
“Leaders shared a commitment to preparation through long-term, deliberate strategies, while non-leaders were more often focused on short-term priorities,” Pierfrancesco Manenti, vice president analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a statement announcing the survey results.
“Most leaders have yet to invest in the most advanced technologies (e.g. real-time visibility, digital supply chain twin), but plan to do so in the next three-to-five years,” Manenti also said in the statement. “Leaders see technology as an enabler to their overall business strategies, while non-leaders more often invest in technology first, without having fully established their foundational capabilities.”
As part of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the future drivers of influence on supply chain performance over the next three to five years. The top five drivers are: achievement capability of AI (74%); the amount of new ESG regulations and trade policies being released (67%); geopolitical fight/transition for power (65%); control over data (62%); and talent scarcity (59%).
The analysis also identified four unique profiles of supply chain organizations, based on what their leaders deem as the most crucial capabilities for empowering their organizations over the next three to five years.
First, 54% of retailers are looking for ways to increase their financial recovery from returns. That’s because the cost to return a purchase averages 27% of the purchase price, which erases as much as 50% of the sales margin. But consumers have their own interests in mind: 76% of shoppers admit they’ve embellished or exaggerated the return reason to avoid a fee, a 39% increase from 2023 to 204.
Second, return experiences matter to consumers. A whopping 80% of shoppers stopped shopping at a retailer because of changes to the return policy—a 34% increase YoY.
Third, returns fraud and abuse is top-of-mind-for retailers, with wardrobing rising 38% in 2024. In fact, over two thirds (69%) of shoppers admit to wardrobing, which is the practice of buying an item for a specific reason or event and returning it after use. Shoppers also practice bracketing, or purchasing an item in a variety of colors or sizes and then returning all the unwanted options.
Fourth, returns come with a steep cost in terms of sustainability, with returns amounting to 8.4 billion pounds of landfill waste in 2023 alone.
“As returns have become an integral part of the shopper experience, retailers must balance meeting sky-high expectations with rising costs, environmental impact, and fraudulent behaviors,” Amena Ali, CEO of Optoro, said in the firm’s “2024 Returns Unwrapped” report. “By understanding shoppers’ behaviors and preferences around returns, retailers can create returns experiences that embrace their needs while driving deeper loyalty and protecting their bottom line.”
Facing an evolving supply chain landscape in 2025, companies are being forced to rethink their distribution strategies to cope with challenges like rising cost pressures, persistent labor shortages, and the complexities of managing SKU proliferation.
1. Optimize labor productivity and costs. Forward-thinking businesses are leveraging technology to get more done with fewer resources through approaches like slotting optimization, automation and robotics, and inventory visibility.
2. Maximize capacity with smart solutions. With e-commerce volumes rising, facilities need to handle more SKUs and orders without expanding their physical footprint. That can be achieved through high-density storage and dynamic throughput.
3. Streamline returns management. Returns are a growing challenge, thanks to the continued growth of e-commerce and the consumer practice of bracketing. Businesses can handle that with smarter reverse logistics processes like automated returns processing and reverse logistics visibility.
4. Accelerate order fulfillment with robotics. Robotic solutions are transforming the way orders are fulfilled, helping businesses meet customer expectations faster and more accurately than ever before by using autonomous mobile robots (AMRs and robotic picking.
5. Enhance end-of-line packaging. The final step in the supply chain is often the most visible to customers. So optimizing packaging processes can reduce costs, improve efficiency, and support sustainability goals through automated packaging systems and sustainability initiatives.
That clash has come as retailers have been hustling to adjust to pandemic swings like a renewed focus on e-commerce, then swiftly reimagining store experiences as foot traffic returned. But even as the dust settles from those changes, retailers are now facing renewed questions about how best to define their omnichannel strategy in a world where customers have increasing power and information.
The answer may come from a five-part strategy using integrated components to fortify omnichannel retail, EY said. The approach can unlock value and customer trust through great experiences, but only when implemented cohesively, not individually, EY warns.
The steps include:
1. Functional integration: Is your operating model and data infrastructure siloed between e-commerce and physical stores, or have you developed a cohesive unit centered around delivering seamless customer experience?
2. Customer insights: With consumer centricity at the heart of operations, are you analyzing all touch points to build a holistic view of preferences, behaviors, and buying patterns?
3. Next-generation inventory: Given the right customer insights, how are you utilizing advanced analytics to ensure inventory is optimized to meet demand precisely where and when it’s needed?
4. Distribution partnerships: Having ensured your customers find what they want where they want it, how are your distribution strategies adapting to deliver these choices to them swiftly and efficiently?
5. Real estate strategy: How is your real estate strategy interconnected with insights, inventory and distribution to enhance experience and maximize your footprint?
When approached cohesively, these efforts all build toward one overarching differentiator for retailers: a better customer experience that reaches from brand engagement and order placement through delivery and return, the EY study said. Amid continued volatility and an economy driven by complex customer demands, the retailers best set up to win are those that are striving to gain real-time visibility into stock levels, offer flexible fulfillment options and modernize merchandising through personalized and dynamic customer experiences.
Geopolitical rivalries, alliances, and aspirations are rewiring the global economy—and the imposition of new tariffs on foreign imports by the U.S. will accelerate that process, according to an analysis by Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
Without a broad increase in tariffs, world trade in goods will keep growing at an average of 2.9% annually for the next eight years, the firm forecasts in its report, “Great Powers, Geopolitics, and the Future of Trade.” But the routes goods travel will change markedly as North America reduces its dependence on China and China builds up its links with the Global South, which is cementing its power in the global trade map.
“Global trade is set to top $29 trillion by 2033, but the routes these goods will travel is changing at a remarkable pace,” Aparna Bharadwaj, managing director and partner at BCG, said in a release. “Trade lanes were already shifting from historical patterns and looming US tariffs will accelerate this. Navigating these new dynamics will be critical for any global business.”
To understand those changes, BCG modeled the direct impact of the 60/25/20 scenario (60% tariff on Chinese goods, a 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, and a 20% on imports from all other countries). The results show that the tariffs would add $640 billion to the cost of importing goods from the top ten U.S. import nations, based on 2023 levels, unless alternative sources or suppliers are found.
In terms of product categories imported by the U.S., the greatest impact would be on imported auto parts and automotive vehicles, which would primarily affect trade with Mexico, the EU, and Japan. Consumer electronics, electrical machinery, and fashion goods would be most affected by higher tariffs on Chinese goods. Specifically, the report forecasts that a 60% tariff rate would add $61 billion to cost of importing consumer electronics products from China into the U.S.