I feel like I'm spending too much money. - Page 3

The cost of supplies, including pans, should be allocated as overhead across all orders taken during the useful life of the supplies. This means that every customer is paying for a portion of all your pans, even pans that aren't being used for their order. Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but I think this is an important point that is too often overlooked when costing products.

If you don't feel comfortable charging back the entire cost of a specialty pan you can charge a percentage you deem appropriate or just add it in with the rest of your overhead, but in my mind that's more unfair since other customers will be subsidizing the customer who chooses a design with a specialty pan.



The whole point of a specialty pan or stencil is to reduce or eliminate the added labor, which means the customer saves on labor costs. If the labor cost of the order with a specialty pan is the same as without a specialty pan, there's no point in buying the pan in the first place. By the same token, if the savings in labor is less than the price of the specialty pan, it might make more sense to execute the design without the specialty pan (assuming there is no loss of quality).



On the contrary...if the customer asks about the price difference for different designs, I explain that the more expensive design is more complex and will require additional labor and/or specialty equipment (depending on the design). There's absolutely nothing wrong with telling the customer this up-front either.

Ideally yes, but as I said before it may not be realistic to stock every possible shape and size of pan due to budget and space constraints.



Depends on how much you allocate to that one customer's order. If you think you will be using that shape again, allocate less than 100%.



If you are more conservative when estimating whether or not a shape will be used again, and you use a shaped pan more than you estimate, then you're right that you will be paid more than once for the pan (but not 2x, since the allocation to the second order should be considerably lower than 100%). This situation is better than the alternative, when you recover less than the full cost and end up paying the cost out of your own wages and/or profit margin.

In which world are you living in where you know that you know that you KNOW you will only use the pan twice? It's a petal pan. I see them on cakes all the time.

You don't know anything for sure, which is why you need to estimate based on what you know about trends in the industry. If you guess too conservatively you would just lower the allocation on future orders.

For something relatively generic like a petal pan I would probably allocate 25% or so (plus profit margin) to the order. We had an order a few years ago with a detailed Chinese dragon design, and we charged 100%+ of the cost of the mold to the customer since I was pretty sure we wouldn't be using it again.

Well that's a far cry from your original thoughts of charging them 100%. Are you coming around Jason??

You could also start suggesting the petal shape in future designs so you have more of a chance of using it many times.

Not really, that's just the general algorithm I use to determine allocation of new specialty equipment. A 100% chargeback is merely one example of implementing that algorithm for equipment that you are fairly confident won't be used again.



That's definitely a good strategy, but when determining allocation for the initial order you shouldn't assume that this type of future promotion will work.

I won't tell anyone that I won. It will be our secret.

And now, since I know you lurve to have the last word...

Ladies and gentlemen....JASON "Everybody's wrong but me" KRAFT!!!!!! Wahoo!!!!! clap clap clap!!!!!

The floor....... is yours......

It was probably my fault by not generalizing the 100% chargeback example into an algorithm earlier (since that's an extreme data point) but hopefully it's more clear where I'm coming from re allocation of new equipment, and when it makes sense to charge back some or all of the cost.

Personally I feel it's more productive to look at threads from a win-win perspective (everybody wins when threads stay on topic) instead of win-lose, the only time people lose is when personal attacks come out. This is a discussion, not a competition.

Jason, that was a great lesson in fair-play. Maybe you could remember your helpful hints there in future threads. I didn't personally attack you. Pretty sure we've seen worse.

To clarify, I wasn't referring to this specific thread when I mentioned personal attacks, just that threads tend to be win-win when a topic is actually being discussed (like this one) and win-lose when people attack each other (that didn't happen here).

Wow! What a read! I have to say that I have added some to my quotes for items that I don't have and had to special order. I always make my customers aware of this though and I don't charge full price. It is usually towards the shipping of a special item and a little towards the item itself. I have not had a problem. These are not everyday things, but special molds that can get pricey. I have yet to have someone go to another baker because of it. They are just happy that I was so open about the process. Now, having said that, my prices are not very high and a $60 item can kill me!

As far as being reimbursed, I don't have to worry about that now, but when I worked at a state job, we were told that we were having our gas cards taken away for the cars that we used for State business. We were going to have to pay for the gas with a private credit card and they would pay that (less interest and charges because they are late paying for everything). I quit my job. I don't use credit cards and our State only pays once a month. They would not let me pay cash either. I had to have a credit card. No love lost. I didn't like the job anyway. My husband on the other hand has to purchase things in the field all of the time out of pocket and he sends in the receipt (he can pay cash) and they pay him back. The items are no more than $10 so I don't mind that. I just wasn't in the position to pay $400 a month for fuel when I only made (before taxes) $1,200.

In the end, you need to talk to your boss and then make an informed decision that you are comfortable with. If they want you to pay and don't give (or are slow in paying) you the money back, it will harbor ill will. If you are an employee and don't have the say on what is used, they need to give you guidelines on what is acceptable to make. Even though I am my own boss and have been for almost 17 years, I still talk to my hubby before I spend more than $30 on a specific item. It has saved me from spending money on things that I really didn't need.

Good luck to you in your new cake adventures. I don't think that your cake should belong in cake wrecks. I think you should get gold stars for having the guts to make the leap! Great job!!!!!!!

This has been an interesting read. I can see both sides, and therefore won't give an opinion however,
Jason you said " (but not 2x, since the allocation to the second order should be considerably lower than 100%)"

The only thing with doing this, your prices wouldn't be consistent, something that could be dangerous if customers discuss it amongst themselves!

That's a good point...but when dealing with a custom design that requires specialty equipment it's unlikely two customers will have exactly the same specs, so it won't be an apples-to-apples comparison.

Even if it is an exact comparison, IMO it's better than the alternatives (taking a loss on the specialty pan, giving money back to the first customer, or also charging the second customer 100% of the pan's cost).

But I would see myself as using them again. Why wouldn't I use them again? They are a common bakery tool. I'd be offering them out as an option. Same with the damask stencils.