Is It Time to Rethink Globalized Supply Chains?

Post by hef19898 » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:40 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #60

hef19898 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over a decade ago, the supply chain hype was RFID chips. Now, more htan ten years laer, they are not used besides your occasional pallet tracking. or for hteft preventin at shops. And RFID would just have replaced bar codes, so no process changes necessary for a first implementation. Blockchain is a different beast. And most companies wouldn't like the full transparency that comes with it. Decentralized ledgers would…

> And RFID would just have replaced bar codes, so no process changes necessary for a first implementation. There would have been changes necessary. RFID chips fall as electronics under RoHS and probably regional/national recycling regulation which means that their introduction into products would cause an enormous overhead. Additionally chips cost at least 10ct each in bulk which means for a lot of 1m units you would…

Post by toss1 » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

fnord123 wrote: post #65

toss1 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly! I have always thought it was insane from a national security perspective to allow functionally all of key manufacturing capabilities (e.g., microprocessors) to go offshore. Nevermind the risks of inserted backdoors, etc, just the external sources of failure rapidly become too great. Yes, this would require subsidies & regulations, and be on a quarter-to-quarter and in most fiscal years "inefficient" use of c…

It is insane to think that every country must have their fully end to end supply chains. Italy doesn't need to manufacture microprocessors despite the backdoors that Intel tries to introduce.

Post by r00fus » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

alexose wrote: post #64

tvanantwerp wrote: post #36

I feel like the problem is less that supply chains are globalized, and more that they aren't redundant. By that I mean, there's too much reliance on China as the primary producer/exporter for countless industries and products. Having just one nation account for such a large share of manufacturing introduces single points of failure. It would be wise to have multiple sources for any given good, especially if it's esse…

In my experience, it's not that companies are choosing any one strategy over another. It's more that companies have no idea what their supply chain actually looks like. Only that the widgets show up at their loading dock every week, and that the shipments have always been reliable in the past, so that there's no reason to look any further. There are often strong disincentives, as well. Nike, for example, got themselv…

Post by stickfigure » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

wtdo wrote: post #70

rileymat2 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have always thought it was insane from a national security perspective to allow functionally all of key manufacturing capabilities (e.g., microprocessors) to go offshore. I am not sure, a completely dependent world may make us safer as wars will very hard to execute.

That's true so long as everyone is dependent on each other. If, everyone is dependent on one country, that doesn't hold China has a near monopoly on a lot of production. Countries that depend on them certainly won't go to war with them, but that doesn't hinder China from starting a war with those countries, and even gives them an advantage. And it doesn't stop dependent countries from warring with each other and that…

Post by darkarmani » Thu, Mar 19, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

bkeyes wrote: post #44

jimbob45 wrote: post #16

Counterpoint: YKK (look at your zipper) relies on absolutely no one else for its supply chain [0]. This could easily be seen as a waste by those who would say YKK should just source its metal from the foundry down the street. It's easy to do a quick thought experiment in your head to think about how feasible it might be for every company to vertically integrate the way YKK has. On the other hand, YKK can't get jerked…

Never heard of them. Their company setup is pretty impressive. However to say 'relies on absolutely no one else for its supply chain' is an extreme exaggeration and frankly impossible. They don't make the computers, fiber optics, switches, exchanges, or software that their web site requires to run. They don't own the fleet of trucks, boats, and planes required to get their product to their customers - or their raw ma…