11.07.2015 Views

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

Download as a PDF - CiteSeerX

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Cost To Purch<strong>as</strong>eReverse auctions have been successful in helping buyersreceive the lowest priced fixtures on the market. This initialinvestment seems to be the most important purch<strong>as</strong>e decisionfor buyers of national accounts, who are purch<strong>as</strong>ing hundredsor thousands of fixtures in bulk to be used in multiplefacilities. However, this limited-focus buying decision maystill cost buyers more in upfront costs than they realize sincethe information provided in the reverse auction cannot providea true comparison of products.To determine purch<strong>as</strong>e price, buyers must calculate thenumber of fixtures needed. However, buyers that use alighting photometric layout created byone lighting manufacturer and <strong>as</strong>sumethis calculated quantity will work forall manufacturers’ products run therisk of being dissatisfied with the lightingperformance. What buyers don’trealize is that although two fixturesmay seem to have the same specifications,the lighting photometric performancedictates how many fixtures willbe required to maintain performancelevels. In turn, a better performing fixturewould allow installers to space fixturesfurther apart, resulting in theneed to purch<strong>as</strong>e fewer fixtures, whichreduces purch<strong>as</strong>e costs.For example, in a 500,000 sq. ft.retail distribution center, a buyer mayreceive prices on two 400 W MetalHalide aluminum reflector high bay fixtures.Fixture 1 features a round reflectorpriced at $.09 per sq. ft. to purch<strong>as</strong>e,while Fixture 2 features a highly engineeredfaceted elliptical reflector, pricedat $.11 per sq. ft. to purch<strong>as</strong>e. With thelimited information provided in thereverse auction, uninformed buyerswould believe that with the $.02 pricedifference, Fixture 1 would be the bestpurch<strong>as</strong>e, saving $10,000 in purch<strong>as</strong>ecosts. However, what this process doesnot reveal is that due to the superiorphotometric performance, the ellipticalreflector actually requires 25 percentfewer fixtures to provide the same illumination.(See Figure 2).Another factor in the cost to purch<strong>as</strong>ea lighting system is the cost oflabor to install the fixtures. A reverseauction usually does not considerinstallation cost and therefore may notprovide the owner with a realistic cost.Fixtures that feature e<strong>as</strong>y-to-installbrackets can reduce set-up times andlower installation costs. For instance,fixtures have been designed for nationalretailers to reduce their cost to install by 50 percent, whileincre<strong>as</strong>ing their initial cost by only 10 percent. In a reverseauction, the owner would never have the opportunity torealize this substantial savings and consequently, would notbe able to take advantage of a greatly improved return oninvestment.Thom<strong>as</strong> Lighting is working with several national retailersto upgrade their existing fluorescent lighting systems with anew retrofit fixture that makes older retrofit kits obsolete. Areverse auction might eliminate this new technology becausethe new fixture does not comply with the old technologyspecification. The end-user would have no chance to realizewww.iesna.org

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!