Precision Cost Engineering. Zero Guesswork.

We decompose products to their atomic cost drivers—material, machine time, labor, and overhead—so you negotiate with data, not hope.

Request Sample Report arrow_forward

Procurement Without Cost Intelligence Is Just Guesswork

check_circle

You're Operating in the Dark

  • ✕ Supplier quotes vary 30-50% for identical parts
  • ✕ You negotiate on price, not cost structure
  • ✕ No way to know if a "good deal" is actually good
  • ✕ Engineering changes blow up costs—and you find out too late
gavel

Your Team Lacks Leverage

  • ✕ Suppliers control cost conversations
  • ✕ Quote rejections have no data backing
  • ✕ Cost-down initiatives are finger-in-the-wind exercises
  • ✕ Make vs. Buy decisions are political, not analytical
money_off

You're Leaving Money on the Table

  • ✕ Supplier margin is hidden in "value-added" line items
  • ✕ Material costs are marked up 15-30% with no visibility
  • ✕ Overhead allocations are inflated
  • ✕ Tooling quotes are accepted at face value

We Give You the Numbers to Win.

The Science of Should Costing

We deconstruct every cent of your product's manufacturing lifecycle using global benchmarks and engineering first principles.

inventory_2
Materials
+
groups
Labor
+
schedule
Machine Time
+
construction
Tooling
+
business
Overhead
+
trending_up
Profit
=
analytics
SHOULD COST

Our Process

architecture

1. 2D/3D Drawing Analysis

DFM review, weight calculation, and tolerance check to determine feasibility.

settings

2. Process Selection

Optimal machine selection, cycle time estimation, and setup time calculation.

public

3. Regional Cost Mapping

Applying local material rates, energy costs, and labor rates for the target manufacturing region.

business

4. Overhead & Profit Modeling

Factoring in factory overheads, SG&A, and a reasonable profit margin.

local_shipping

5. Final Cost Roll-up

Calculation of Ex-works price, logistics add-ons, and total landed cost.

Engineering dashboard
The Methodology

Should Costing: The Bottom-Up Cost Model That Changes Everything

Should Costing is a rigorous, component-level cost buildup that calculates what a part should cost based on physics and economics, not just market pricing.

layers

Materials & Labor

Market rates, scrap factors, yield losses, and process time × regional labor rates.

precision_manufacturing

Machine Time & Tooling

Cycle time × equipment hourly rates and one-time tool cost amortization.

trending_up

Overhead & Profit

Realistic allocations (not supplier guesses) and industry-standard margin targets.

price_check

The Output

A complete cost breakdown—down to the penny.

  • check_circle Where supplier quotes are inflated
  • check_circle Which cost drivers you can negotiate
  • check_circle What a fair price looks like
  • check_circle How engineering changes will impact cost
Get a Sample Report arrow_forward

Strategic Cost Services

Applied intelligence for every stage of the product lifecycle.

analytics

Should Cost Analysis

Bottom-up costing for negotiation leverage against supplier quotes.

difference

Price Variance Analysis (PVA)

Comparing effectively paid prices vs. calculated should costs to spot gaps.

build

VAVE (Value Engineering)

Cost reduction via design optimization without compromising functionality.

compare_arrows

Tear Down and Benchmarking

Comparing capabilities and cost structures of multiple suppliers across regions.

store

Make vs. Buy Analysis

ROI analysis to determine whether to manufacture in-house or outsource.

handyman

Tooling Cost Estimation

Precise costing for molds, dies, and fixtures to avoid overpayment.

Applications

When Should Costing Makes the Difference

1

RFQ Quote Validation

Scenario

"You receive quotes from 3 suppliers. Prices vary by 40%."

construction What We Do

  • • Run Should Cost on the component
  • • Identify which supplier is closest to "should cost"
  • • Expose hidden margin in high quotes

check_circle Result

Confident supplier selection + 15-25% cost reduction

2

Cost-Down Initiatives

Scenario

"Your CFO mandates 10% cost reduction across all purchased parts."

construction What We Do

  • • Should Cost top spend items
  • • Identify high-margin components
  • • Recommend DFM changes

check_circle Result

Data-backed cost reduction without sacrificing quality

3

Make vs. Buy Analysis

Scenario

"Your team debates whether to make a component in-house or buy it."

construction What We Do

  • • Calculate fully-loaded internal cost
  • • Run Should Cost for external suppliers
  • • Compare TCO (Total Cost of Ownership)

check_circle Result

ROI-based decision (not politics)

4

New Product Introduction (NPI)

Scenario

"Engineering hands you a design. You need target cost before quoting."

construction What We Do

  • • Early-stage Should Cost from CAD
  • • Identify cost drivers before tooling commits
  • • Recommend DFM/DTC optimizations

check_circle Result

Hit cost targets from Day 1

5

Engineering Change Orders (ECOs)

Scenario

"Engineering proposes a design change. Supplier quotes 50% cost increase."

construction What We Do

  • • Model cost impact of the ECO
  • • Validate supplier's claim
  • • Propose cost-neutral alternatives

check_circle Result

Informed decision—accept, reject, or redesign

Strategy

Negotiate With Data, Not Hope

block The Problem with Traditional Negotiation

  • You ask for 10% off (because why not?)
  • Supplier says no (because you have no leverage)
  • You accept or walk away (both bad outcomes)

analytics Negotiation with Should Cost

  • You present the cost breakdown
  • You challenge specific line items with data
  • Supplier knows you know the real cost
  • Negotiation becomes collaborative, not adversarial

handshake What You Walk Away With

  • check Fair pricing based on actual cost structure
  • check Supplier respect (they know you're informed)
  • check Long-term partnership (not one-time squeeze)

Beyond Should Costing

psychology

VAVE (Value Analysis)

Systematic approach to improving product value by analyzing function vs. cost.

  • • Identify over-engineered features
  • • Propose alternative materials or processes
  • • Maintain performance while reducing cost
build_circle

DFM (Design for Mfg)

Optimize designs to reduce manufacturing complexity.

  • • Simplify part geometries
  • • Reduce secondary operations
  • • Standardize components across lines
savings

DTC (Design to Cost)

Design process driven by target cost constraints.

  • • Set cost targets before design freeze
  • • Evaluate cost impact of design decisions
  • • Ensure profitability from concept stage
VelociousTech VelociousTech VelociousTech VelociousTech VelociousTech

Real World Impact

Automotive OEM reduced spend on die-cast parts by 18% using our bottom-up model.

Request Audit
Should Cost vs Without Should Cost Comparison