This is a dashboard report generated by SourceOptima that analyzes 1,240 components (535 unique), shows that 81% of spend is concentrated among three suppliers and 71% of anodized parts are single-sourced, highlights issues like 74 duplicate SKU clusters comprising 18% volume, and presents quantified actions to reduce procurement risk and costs.
Questions? Book a call or send us a message:
Book a 15-min Call
Or email: contact@sourceoptima.com
Executive Summary
Modeled Spend by Supplier
Material Distribution
Q2 2025: Supplier-Mix Portfolio Highlights
1,240 components (535 unique)
- 81% Spend dominated by top 3 machine shops (Orion, Copperfield, BluePeak).
- Heavy finish-risk: 71% of all anodized parts handled by a single supplier.
- SKU duplicates: AI found 74 “shadow-twin” clusters, ~18% volume/$0.4M phantom spend.
- Data integrity: 18% of prints miss key specs, blocking dual-source efforts and triggering inflated quotes.
- Mega-part bottleneck: 10 part-IDs account for 22% spend and are all single-sourced.
- Immediate Actions: Deduplicate SKUs, diversify anodize finishing, and run competitive quotes on strategic builds for rapid savings and risk reduction.
Supplier-Mix Table (Key Portfolio Position)
| Supplier | % Parts Covered | % Modeled Spend | Key Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Orion Machining | 18 % | 32 % | CNC, Black Anodize |
| Copperfield Manufacturing | 14 % | 25 % | CNC, Black Anodize |
| BluePeak Industrial | 15 % | 24 % | CNC, Black Anodize |
| SilverCreek Fabrication | 10 % | 10 % | Weldments, Chambers |
| Vanguard Plastics & Metals | 7 % | 4 % | Plastics, Sheet-Metal |
| Ironspire Precision | 6 % | 2 % | Turned Components |
| Other | 30 % | 3 % | Low-volume/legacy |
Over 80% of modeled dollars controlled by three neighboring machine shops.
Key Metrics
Coverage vs Modeled Spend
Portfolio Metrics
Component Records
1,240
535 Unique
Top-3 Supplier Spend
$5.3M
81% total
Single-Lane Anodize
71%
Finish Bottleneck
Missing Mat'l/Finish
18%
Data Risk
Duplicate SKU Clusters
74
18% volume
Mega-Part Families
10
22% spend
Process Distribution
High-Impact Portfolios
- 10 mega-part families (chambers, weldments) = 22% of spend—all single-sourced.
- Plastic SKU pool: 67 parts (low complexity, easy switches).
- Only 11 unique parts have no alt. supplier listed (focus for onboarding).
- Vacuum chambers/platens single-source
Analytical Deep Dive
Supplier Landscape: Spend & Part Count
Portfolio Health & Diversity
- Dominance: 3 shops (Orion, Copperfield, BluePeak) = most of modeled spend; strong overlap in Aluminum machine + finish capabilities.
- Resilience: Only 11 unique items have no listed alt. source; most gaps = documentation, not true capacity.
- Material Base: 57%+ of all parts are 6061-T6 Al; all top-3 shops use the same 2 raw stock vendors.
- Process Risk: 71% of all parts—single external anodizer (MIL-A-8625). Major supply bottleneck.
- Mega-parts: 10 chamber/well families = 22% of cost, all single-source. Lead-time/cost highly sensitive to outage/quality hold.
Finish/Source "Heatmap"
Supplier-Finish Risk Insight
- Red Zone: Single-lane black anodize: 70%+ of all orders run through 1 finish supplier.
- Documentation Bottleneck: 18% missing material/finish slows quoting and blocks dual-sourcing.
- Mega-part chokehold: Top-value builds entirely dependent on 1 supplier.
Data Quality by Supplier
| Supplier | # Parts Missing Mat’l/Finish | % of Their Lines |
|---|---|---|
| Orion Machining | 31 | 13 % |
| BluePeak Industrial | 23 | 9 % |
| Copperfield Manufacturing | 21 | 13 % |
| SilverCreek Fabrication | 17 | 14 % |
| Vanguard Plastics & Metals | 15 | 16 % |
| Others | 39 | >15 % |
Missing key specs = slower onboarding, inability to dual-source, inflated vendor pricing.
AI-Detected SKU Duplicates: Impact
- 74 "shadow-twin" SKU clusters detected—identical geometry, mismatched identifiers ($420k/yr in inflated demand).
- Split Orders & Lost Volume: PO’s unnecessarily split, lost price breaks (avg 5-7% cost penalty).
- Revision Drift: Rev-A/B split, leading to 12% unnecessary quote inflation.
- Phantom demand: Typos, minuscule description changes caused orders to be doubled.
- Top 10 duplicate families: $52k price break leakage.
How caught?
AI/NLP clustering—embedding matching, not just symbol match.
Duplicate & Data Error Types
| Category | Example | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Dup. part # | 75300412 MODULE, SUPPORT “E” | PO split in two, 7% lost discount |
| Rev drift | 30-100245-00 (A vs B) | 12% unnecessary quote increase |
| OCR typo | “STR INVRT” vs “STR, Invrt” | $230.20 purchase recorded twice |
Root: Manual review blocked by case, formatting, and alias rules. AI contextual match closes blind spots.
Quick Win / Mid-Term Action Table
| Part No. / Family | Description (snapshot) | Quick-Win Action | Benefit / Est. $ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 75300412-E (2 lines) | MODULE, SUPPORT, ALPHAFLUX (duplicate SKUs) | Merge SKUs & issue combined PO | +5-7 % price break; simplify BOM |
| 45-237895-01 / 45-237896-01 | Large SigmaX platen & well plates (>$5k ea) | Competitive RFQ to 2 alt. mills | Target 8-10 % cost, capacity back-up |
| 76198347 / 76198371 Series | Vacuum chambers (SilverCreek only) | Qualify second Ni-P shop (EU or US West) | Lead-time hedge; ~2 weeks faster |
| 30-100288-00 | HARDBLOCK, YZ Table – small anodized block | Shift to secondary anodizer pilot lot | Proves dual-source; frees main line |
| 40071145-B | PUSH PIN, INDEX – material field blank | Engineering update (spec SS vs. Brass) | Prevent over-pricing / wrong quotes |
| 54-822301-XX (16-34 sizes) | WINDOW, SNAP-IN – 5 variants, same drawing | Bundle passivate/paint lot; single blanket PO | 12% plating + 6% paint save |
| 64-191802-00 / 64-191803-00 | Polyacetal Sleeve & Foot (air actuator) | Convert to water-jet blank + light machining | 20% part cost; 1-day lead |
| 75301538 / 75301539 | Polyacetal cable clamps (outer & inner) | Combine orders; vendor to run in one setup | 15% setup amortization |
| 78-117807-00 / 117808-00 | Cross-bar brackets – clear anodize, low vol. | Piggy-back on larger clear-anodize lot | Avoid min-lot charge ($500 / run) |
| 54-899999-00 | TESLA BLOCK (masking holes) | Supply vendor masking fixture; reduce tape labor | -30 min labor / piece (~$40) |
Quick Wins
Immediate Action Items
- Duplicate SKU Cleanup: Merge 74 “shadow-twin” records; consolidated POs yield $52K+ instant savings.
- Diversify Anodize: Dual-qualify a secondary NADCAP shop to mitigate 71% finish bottleneck.
- Competitive “Mega-Part” RFQ: Top 10 chamber/platen to at least 2 alternates = 8-10% direct cost recapture.
- Data Hygiene Mandate: Block ECO releases missing material/finish. Auto-fill from filenames to eliminate quoting lag/leak.
- Bundle Platings: Group 34+ black anodize part numbers into blanket lots for >15% plating savings; fewer shop turns, less delay.
- Waterjet/Laser Plastics: Convert low-complexity Polyacetal/ABS to 2D cutting – 20-30% part cost cut, 1-day lead.
Strategic Mid-Term Actions
- Supplier Qualification: Qualify second shop for vacuum/hard-nickel hardware (currently sole sourced).
- Geometry-as-Part-ID: Shift to 3D-step/geometry-based part numbering; blocks future duplicate risk.
- Digital Thread Pilot: Next design cycle to use model-based definition, aiming to cut 70% of incomplete prints.
Final Takeaway & Leadership Recommendation
- Majority of spend exposed to single-point process risks (finishers, mega-hardware shops).
- Action now: SKU deduplication, anodize dual-sourcing, competitive quoting on high-value platforms.
- Underlying data entropy is both a spend and visibility challenge but is solvable now; no further analytics rounds required.
Authorize:
- Consolidated duplicate cleanup + instant re-negotiation
- Secondary anodizer onboarding
- Immediate bundled RFQ on high-value families
- Data hygiene policy (block incomplete ECO/print release)
Ready to Take Action?
Directly book a 15-minute consultation with our CEO or send us a note. We're here to help you control risk and unlock efficiency.