Olli, a 3D printed, self-driving minibus, ready to hit the roads in US

[CityFarmer]

3D printing manufacturing is getting real over time. The cost structure of the service, is crucial, but no clue is given. Flexibility, and delivery time will demand a premium on traditional mean...

I wonder which sector are the main customer now?

UPS to launch on-demand 3D printing manufacturing network in Asia

SINGAPORE (Sept 19): UPS and partner Fast Radius is opening a 3D printing factory in a UPS facility in Singapore by the end of this year.

The move will expanding UPS’s on-demand 3D printing network in Asia and enable customers to increase their supply chain efficiency with additive manufacturing, says the integrated logistics services provider.

UPS also will also create a Centre of Excellence to help customers develop supply chain solutions and promote wider applicability of 3D printing. Businesses can also use Fast Radius’ On Demand Production Platform to produce industrial parts, which will then be delivered via UPS’s global and intra-Asia transportation network.
...
http://www.theedgemarkets.com.sg/sg/arti...twork-asia

[Clement]

3D printing manufacturing is getting real over time. The cost structure of the service, is crucial, but no clue is given. Flexibility, and delivery time will demand a premium on traditional mean...

I wonder which sector are the main customer now?

UPS to launch on-demand 3D printing manufacturing network in Asia

SINGAPORE (Sept 19): UPS and partner Fast Radius is opening a 3D printing factory in a UPS facility in Singapore by the end of this year.

The move will expanding UPS’s on-demand 3D printing network in Asia and enable customers to increase their supply chain efficiency with additive manufacturing, says the integrated logistics services provider.

UPS also will also create a Centre of Excellence to help customers develop supply chain solutions and promote wider applicability of 3D printing. Businesses can also use Fast Radius’ On Demand Production Platform to produce industrial parts, which will then be delivered via UPS’s global and intra-Asia transportation network.
...
http://www.theedgemarkets.com.sg/sg/arti...twork-asia

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

[CityFarmer]

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

[Clement]

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

I don't think so.

I guess in theory, it is possible for a company to acquire the raw materials only wherever and whenever they are needed, send them off for manufacturing and have them delivered straight to customers. It just creates an excessively fragile supply chain in which failure at any point might have cascading effects.

I think with products becoming increasingly modular and lead times becoming shorter, risks can be more effectively mitigated by postponing the final customization till after there is more robust evidence of customer preference and demand. Inventory will still be needed, but might be increasingly in a more generic form, with the final value add only performed when needed.

Besides, humans will always find a way to be too optimistic in forecasting demand for their products.

[CityFarmer]

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

I don't think so.

I guess in theory, it is possible for a company to acquire the raw materials only wherever and whenever they are needed, send them off for manufacturing and have them delivered straight to customers. It just creates an excessively fragile supply chain in which failure at any point might have cascading effects.

I think with products becoming increasingly modular and lead times becoming shorter, risks can be more effectively mitigated by postponing the final customization till after there is more robust evidence of customer preference and demand. Inventory will still be needed, but might be increasingly in a more generic form, with the final value add only performed when needed.

Besides, humans will always find a way to be too optimistic in forecasting demand for their products.

Is there a valid reason, not to let the "manufacturer" handle the raw material inventory? IMO, there is no reason not to reduce the logistic cost for the raw material.

[Clement]

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

I don't think so.

I guess in theory, it is possible for a company to acquire the raw materials only wherever and whenever they are needed, send them off for manufacturing and have them delivered straight to customers. It just creates an excessively fragile supply chain in which failure at any point might have cascading effects.

I think with products becoming increasingly modular and lead times becoming shorter, risks can be more effectively mitigated by postponing the final customization till after there is more robust evidence of customer preference and demand. Inventory will still be needed, but might be increasingly in a more generic form, with the final value add only performed when needed.

Besides, humans will always find a way to be too optimistic in forecasting demand for their products.

Is there a valid reason, not to let the "manufacturer" handle the raw material inventory? IMO, there is no reason not to reduce the logistic cost for the raw material.

When i posted that sentence, I was thinking along the lines of "3D printing as a service" as an add on to the warehousing and supply chain value added service. I probably should be thinking more along the lines of contract manufacturing so i think you are probably right.

[CityFarmer]

I think this is a good idea on UPS's part.

The logistics giants have been slowly integrating themselves deeper into customer workflows through providing assembly, localisation and other services to support a postponement strategy. This seems to be a logical next step and complements their existing offerings.

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

I don't think so.

I guess in theory, it is possible for a company to acquire the raw materials only wherever and whenever they are needed, send them off for manufacturing and have them delivered straight to customers. It just creates an excessively fragile supply chain in which failure at any point might have cascading effects.

I think with products becoming increasingly modular and lead times becoming shorter, risks can be more effectively mitigated by postponing the final customization till after there is more robust evidence of customer preference and demand. Inventory will still be needed, but might be increasingly in a more generic form, with the final value add only performed when needed.

Besides, humans will always find a way to be too optimistic in forecasting demand for their products.

Is there a valid reason, not to let the "manufacturer" handle the raw material inventory? IMO, there is no reason not to reduce the logistic cost for the raw material.

When i posted that sentence, I was thinking along the lines of "3D printing as a service" as an add on to the warehousing and supply chain value added service. I probably should be thinking more along the lines of contract manufacturing so i think you are probably right.

I see.

Since the "service" is located as part of the warehousing, it is logical to think along the line of "contract manufacturing service", a small but nimble one. 

[Clement]

Yes, I fully agree.

We have just-in-time (JIT) inventories previously, we might see "JIT" delivery in supply chain soon. Will inventory concept, become an obsolete term soon in supply chain management?  

I don't think so.

I guess in theory, it is possible for a company to acquire the raw materials only wherever and whenever they are needed, send them off for manufacturing and have them delivered straight to customers. It just creates an excessively fragile supply chain in which failure at any point might have cascading effects.

I think with products becoming increasingly modular and lead times becoming shorter, risks can be more effectively mitigated by postponing the final customization till after there is more robust evidence of customer preference and demand. Inventory will still be needed, but might be increasingly in a more generic form, with the final value add only performed when needed.

Besides, humans will always find a way to be too optimistic in forecasting demand for their products.

Is there a valid reason, not to let the "manufacturer" handle the raw material inventory? IMO, there is no reason not to reduce the logistic cost for the raw material.

When i posted that sentence, I was thinking along the lines of "3D printing as a service" as an add on to the warehousing and supply chain value added service. I probably should be thinking more along the lines of contract manufacturing so i think you are probably right.

I see.

Since the "service" is located as part of the warehousing, it is logical to think along the line of "contract manufacturing service", a small but nimble one. 

Yes. 

I realized that I should be thinking of the experience of the end user. However, we should note that the Fast Radius service is still currently limited to mainly plastic parts but with already disruptive implications for distribution and supply chain companies. 

In the US industrial distribution sector, Fastenal was recently trading at high multiples because of their industrial vending solutions and the investment "moat" it provides. The idea was in reducing customer total cost of ownership by providing on demand parts and eliminating manual procurement procedures, and therefore effectively monopolizing the customer's industrial supplies business. Can 3D printing be used, in conjunction with industrial vending, to bypass the need for such distributors in the future?

[CityFarmer]

Yes. 

I realized that I should be thinking of the experience of the end user. However, we should note that the Fast Radius service is still currently limited to mainly plastic parts but with already disruptive implications for distribution and supply chain companies. 

In the US industrial distribution sector, Fastenal was recently trading at high multiples because of their industrial vending solutions and the investment "moat" it provides. The idea was in reducing customer total cost of ownership by providing on demand parts and eliminating manual procurement procedures, and therefore effectively monopolizing the customer's industrial supplies business. Can 3D printing be used, in conjunction with industrial vending, to bypass the need for such distributors in the future?

It is an amusing info on the industrial vending. I don't know it is happening... Thank you