Responding to a Resin-Driven Price Increase
A manufacturer of commercial coffee equipment buys injection-molded housings from a single supplier under a fixed-price contract through December 31. Annual spend is $6.8M. With 60 days left in the term, the supplier requests a 9.2% increase, citing a 14% rise in the polypropylene index since contract start. The supplier's submitted cost breakdown puts resin at 46% of price, labor 18%, energy 9%, and overhead plus margin 27%. The buyer's should-cost model shows resin content of $3.13 per unit at contract start. The supplier refuses to share purchase timing or scrap data. The housings use buyer-owned tooling, and a plant shutdown would cost an estimated $40K per day.
1. Test the supplier's 9.2% request against its own cost breakdown. What is the defensible pass-through, and what questions must be answered?
Read the worked answer
Use the supplier's own percentages. Resin is 46% of price, and the index rose 14%, so the resin pass-through is 0.46 x 14% = 6.44% of price. On $6.8M, that is $437.9K. The request of 9.2% equals $625.6K, leaving about $187.7K unexplained by resin.
Before accepting even 6.44%, ask:
- Which published index, for which grade and region, and what is the exact date range?
- Did the supplier buy forward or hold inventory at older prices? If so, the effective cost increase is lower.
- What are current scrap rates and yield? A scrap improvement could offset part of the increase.
- Are labor and energy actually up? The breakdown shows 27% labor and energy, but no evidence supports those components.
- What volume and mix assumptions underpin the per-unit resin content?
A defensible position is a temporary surcharge capped at 6.44%, supported by index evidence, not a permanent base-price increase.
2. Draft the commercial counter and fallback. What terms protect the buyer while keeping supply?
Read the worked answer
Counter:
- A temporary resin surcharge of 6.44%, effective on the next shipment and recalculated monthly against an agreed index.
- The surcharge expires at contract end, with no change to base price.
- Open-book access to resin purchase records and scrap data, plus an audit right.
- A cap and a 60-day notice requirement for any future adjustment.
- In exchange, offer a 12-month volume commitment and firmer forecasts.
Fallback: accept 4-5% only if the supplier provides index evidence and extends payment terms or holds buffer stock. Do not accept 9.2% permanently.
The BATNA matters. Buyer-owned tooling means the work can be moved, but transfer may take 10 weeks and cost about $120K. With shutdown cost at $40K per day, a transfer threat is credible only with a qualified alternate and safety stock. Use it quietly to hold the line, not to trigger a disruption.
3. What should be done after this negotiation to reduce the single-source exposure?
Read the worked answer
Separate the immediate price dispute from the structural risk. After settling, qualify a second molder for the highest-volume housings. Budget for duplicate tooling or tooling modification, run first-article approval, and place a small share of volume with the alternate even at a modest premium.
In the next contract, include a resin index clause with a defined lag, a symmetric mechanism that also lowers price when the index falls, and a most-favored-customer clause. Require annual should-cost updates and quarterly cost reviews. Track resin exposure as a percentage of spend and report it in the risk register. The goal is not to punish the incumbent but to make the next negotiation competitive.