5 ms·

Can software simplify the supply chain?

62 points by mikece 4y ago

drewcoo 4y ago
If so, that might be the first thing software simplified. Made easier or faster? Sure. Made a profitable wedge into some existing business (a.k.a. disrupted)? Absolutely! But adding layers of complicated stuff only experts understand rarely makes anything simpler. Not to knock Ryan Petersen. He never made that claim once in the entire interview.
ludston 4y ago
Yes. But can somebody help me understand? Flexport seems to be a 3PL (third party logistics) company marketing itself as a software company. There are literally thousands of 3PL companies though. What's the difference between Flexport and say DHL/DSV/UPS/Geodis Wilson/Toll/Yusen/<insert your local 3PL provider>, other than snappy marketing and a position in YCombinator? For comparison. There are software companies that provide software to many 3PL companies, and don't do any actual 3PL themselves.
- rawgabbit 4y ago
  He's claiming they enable clients to navigate the many 3PLs. He claims to offer you the client company, the software, that will let you ship your stuff through any 3PL. He's a broker.
- wiremonger 4y ago
  Flexport is a freight forwarder. You tell them where you want your international shipment to go and they make all the arrangements with the various intermediaries to get it from origin to destination and through customs. I’ve worked with a bunch of freight forwarders and Flexport’s software is far and away the best that I’ve encountered. Most freight forwarders operate on email and Google Sheets. You constantly have to call and prod them to get updates on your shipment. With Flexport everything is in their app and they have good behind the scenes systems for keeping shipment info up to date. It’s kinda hard to explain how much better of an experience they provide to someone who’s never had to deal with freight forwarders.
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    So, an abstraction layer over freight with a good API?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - hef19898 4y ago
    Flexport started to "disrupt global trade" (in a positive sense) and ended as a global freight forwarder. The latter is impressive enough, just a tad short of the initial goal. One software house that I like a lot in the logistics space is WiseTech, a lot of the big shots, e.g. DHL are using it.
  - ludston 4y ago
    Yeah, for sure, a lot of traditional freight forwarders and 3PL providers don't have fancy API's and tracking. But there are certainly a lot that do. And some of those have vertical integration (and therefore potential for massive internal cost savings). I'm not seeing the potential for market disruption in comparison to these players, other than perhaps the massive cash injection Flexport has that these companies don't. To me, the story of Flexport is, "We spent 1 billion dollars, and now we have a profitable Freight Forwarder", which for sure is an amazing success story because that is not easy, but also all their competitors are in their own way pretty amazing.
    - sabertoothed 4y ago
      You seem bitter. There are happy Flexport customers in this thread. Ask them why they are happy. (Not affiliated with Flexport myself)
debacle 4y ago
After COVID, I would prefer a robust, fault tolerant supply chain.
- dehrmann 4y ago
  That's a fair ask, but are you prepared to pay for it?
  - stingraycharles 4y ago
    Didn’t a lot of businesses get into a lot of problems (and as such costs) precisely because of these supply chain problems?
    - andreareina 4y ago
      There's a lot of will now. What about in ten years, how much carrying cost are companies going to be willing to sustain?
      - SQueeeeeL 4y ago
        Ya, if you can optimize this quaters earnings by 6% at the expense of your business literally potentially collapsing in 3-5 years, that is considered optimal under our present system of shareholder ownership. Shareholders by their very nature don't need to care about stewardship or longevity of a business because they own a small portion of a company for a short time.
        dehrmann 4y ago
        > literally potentially collapsing in 3-5 years 3-5 is pessimistic. This was a p99 event. You can count on some level of government bailout for those.
        stingraycharles 4y ago
        There are other types of p99 events that have similar results.
socialismisok 4y ago
The correct question to ask about technology is "... For who?" For who within the supply chain will software make things simpler? Who benefits? Rarely, technology makes things simpler for all parties. It might make the customer's life simpler, or the maintainers, etc. But a lot of technology exists to make some folks wealthier at the expense of others. So in this case, who benefits? It seems like the consumer and the entity shipping goods as part of a global supply chain.
- bmitc 4y ago
  That's a good point. Software will add rigidity when applied to automated processes. I'm not sure the supply chain world needs more rigidity right now.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  See Neil Postman's questions on technology: 1. What is the problem that this new technology solves? 2. Whose problem is it? 3. What new problems do we create by solving this problem? 4. Which people and institutions will be most impacted by a technological solution? 5. What changes in language occur as the result of technological change? 6. Which shifts in economic and political power might result when this technology is adopted? 7. What alternative (and unintended) uses might be made of this technology? <https://scottberkun.com/2016/the-7-questions-for-any-technological-idea/ https://scottberkun.com/2016/the-7-questions-for-any-technol...> <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=dBlfPhsrvtw https://yewtu.be/watch?v=dBlfPhsrvtw> <https://yewtu.be/hlrv7DIHllE?t=50m34s https://yewtu.be/hlrv7DIHllE?t=50m34s> From Technopoly: <https://www.worldcat.org/title/30337681 https://www.worldcat.org/title/30337681> Related: Postman's Five Laws of Technology: 1. “All technological change is a trade-off.” 2. “The advantages and disadvantages of new technologies are never distributed evenly among the population.” 3. “Embedded in every technology there is a powerful idea.” 4. “Technological change is not additive; it is ecological.” 5. “Technology tends to become mythic.” <https://pggalalis.com/postmans-five-laws-of-technology/ https://pggalalis.com/postmans-five-laws-of-technology/> (More detail at the link.)
robomartin 4y ago
Happy Flexport customer here. I'd say, yes, to a point. Maybe it depends on the definition of supply chain. Transportation is, in my opinion, a very small part of the chain. Moving atoms is very different from moving bits and bytes with software. For example, we buy custom aluminum extrusions and other custom-manufactured metal components. The design, validation, sourcing, manufacturing and inspection process is months long. Transportation is that little --important, of course-- sliver of time that happens at the very end of all of that. There's a lot more complexity in an end-to-end supply chain than most people realize. Even buying a screw isn't simple. Software can only touch some of these parts. I'd say very few of them, actually. A recent case. Custom aluminum extrusions. Flexport air-freighted the shipment for us because ocean freight would have taken a million years. The shipment was --we are told by those we contracted to do it-- inspected per our specifications. Well, the shipment was crap. We probably had to throw out half of it. It didn't matter how efficiently it got from point A to point B. The failure happened way before that. This is why very large companies have their employees on site to manage quality. If you don't operate at those scales you can be victimized in ways I cannot even begin to describe.
vonwoodson 4y ago
I’ve always felt that the greatest contribution that software development could contribute to supply chain is the UI/UX paradigm. Like so many bureaucratic systems, it requires expertise to navigate successfully. “No, I didn’t fill out the ID-10-T form, Billy told me to fill out the R3Q-WI.10 and the SF-1053R forms. And, I don’t know what to put in box 1,253-C: what is a “Problem Identification Supervisor Authorization Location NIFPIN”?… I need to go talk to Peggy? Oh, she’s out this week? (Awesome…) What? No, I didn’t… look, no I’m not getting an attitude…” proceeds to be labeled rude and has requisition “slow-walked” Meanwhile, on Amazon, I’ve accidentally bought things because it’s so damned easy to find what I want and spend my money. And, it’s easy and fun. I guess what I’m trying to say is that: computers are incredibly similar to “bureaucratic systems” in that you need to fully understand their inner workings. But, we in the software community take on great efforts to prevent the users from being exposed to all the twine and duct tape that holds the whole thing together. If supply chains were to take UI/UX seriously, businesses would be all the better for it. (Although, saying this suddenly reminds me of all the terrible SAP views and all the gross “internal use” programs we use… sigh)
- hef19898 4y ago
  What makes you think Amazon is fundamentally different behind what customer see?
  - was_a_dev 4y ago
    The complexity of logistics hasn't changed and is no different for Amazon.
    - hef19898 4y ago
      I can confirm that. Amazon is doing it better than most others, for sure, but the effort and complexity is still there. And I'm not sure if looking up tables directly in some database (the Amazon way) and entering data through some cobbled together web interfaces (again, the Amazon way in some cases) is better UI than whatever SAP is providing. I know both, and at least in SAP everything is one place.
LightRailTycoon 4y ago
As a buyer in much smaller part of the supply chain, my experience is that no-one who uses the supply chain wants a simpler supply chain, they want to meet their business goals. If you use software to simplify your supply chain, you'll use that to do more complex things with the supply chain until the gains are erased.
- a_c 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
tharne 4y ago
Theoretically, yes software could. In the real world, adding software to most things just makes them more complex and worse.
- skohan 4y ago
  I don't know, I think email for instance compares pretty favorably to the alternative.

62 points by mikece 4y ago

If so, that might be the first thing software simplified. Made easier or faster? Sure. Made a profitable wedge into some existing business (a.k.a. disrupted)? Absolutely! But adding layers of complicated stuff only experts understand rarely makes anything simpler. Not to knock Ryan Petersen. He never made that claim once in the entire interview.

ludston 4y ago

Yes. But can somebody help me understand? Flexport seems to be a 3PL (third party logistics) company marketing itself as a software company. There are literally thousands of 3PL companies though. What's the difference between Flexport and say DHL/DSV/UPS/Geodis Wilson/Toll/Yusen/<insert your local 3PL provider>, other than snappy marketing and a position in YCombinator? For comparison. There are software companies that provide software to many 3PL companies, and don't do any actual 3PL themselves.

rawgabbit 4y ago
He's claiming they enable clients to navigate the many 3PLs. He claims to offer you the client company, the software, that will let you ship your stuff through any 3PL. He's a broker.
wiremonger 4y ago
Flexport is a freight forwarder. You tell them where you want your international shipment to go and they make all the arrangements with the various intermediaries to get it from origin to destination and through customs. I’ve worked with a bunch of freight forwarders and Flexport’s software is far and away the best that I’ve encountered. Most freight forwarders operate on email and Google Sheets. You constantly have to call and prod them to get updates on your shipment. With Flexport everything is in their app and they have good behind the scenes systems for keeping shipment info up to date. It’s kinda hard to explain how much better of an experience they provide to someone who’s never had to deal with freight forwarders.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  So, an abstraction layer over freight with a good API?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- hef19898 4y ago
  Flexport started to "disrupt global trade" (in a positive sense) and ended as a global freight forwarder. The latter is impressive enough, just a tad short of the initial goal. One software house that I like a lot in the logistics space is WiseTech, a lot of the big shots, e.g. DHL are using it.
- ludston 4y ago
  Yeah, for sure, a lot of traditional freight forwarders and 3PL providers don't have fancy API's and tracking. But there are certainly a lot that do. And some of those have vertical integration (and therefore potential for massive internal cost savings). I'm not seeing the potential for market disruption in comparison to these players, other than perhaps the massive cash injection Flexport has that these companies don't. To me, the story of Flexport is, "We spent 1 billion dollars, and now we have a profitable Freight Forwarder", which for sure is an amazing success story because that is not easy, but also all their competitors are in their own way pretty amazing.
  - sabertoothed 4y ago
    You seem bitter. There are happy Flexport customers in this thread. Ask them why they are happy. (Not affiliated with Flexport myself)

debacle 4y ago

After COVID, I would prefer a robust, fault tolerant supply chain.

dehrmann 4y ago
That's a fair ask, but are you prepared to pay for it?
- stingraycharles 4y ago
  Didn’t a lot of businesses get into a lot of problems (and as such costs) precisely because of these supply chain problems?
  - andreareina 4y ago
    There's a lot of will now. What about in ten years, how much carrying cost are companies going to be willing to sustain?
    - SQueeeeeL 4y ago
      Ya, if you can optimize this quaters earnings by 6% at the expense of your business literally potentially collapsing in 3-5 years, that is considered optimal under our present system of shareholder ownership. Shareholders by their very nature don't need to care about stewardship or longevity of a business because they own a small portion of a company for a short time.
      - dehrmann 4y ago
        > literally potentially collapsing in 3-5 years 3-5 is pessimistic. This was a p99 event. You can count on some level of government bailout for those.
        stingraycharles 4y ago
        There are other types of p99 events that have similar results.

socialismisok 4y ago

The correct question to ask about technology is "... For who?" For who within the supply chain will software make things simpler? Who benefits? Rarely, technology makes things simpler for all parties. It might make the customer's life simpler, or the maintainers, etc. But a lot of technology exists to make some folks wealthier at the expense of others. So in this case, who benefits? It seems like the consumer and the entity shipping goods as part of a global supply chain.

bmitc 4y ago
That's a good point. Software will add rigidity when applied to automated processes. I'm not sure the supply chain world needs more rigidity right now.
dredmorbius 4y ago
See Neil Postman's questions on technology: 1. What is the problem that this new technology solves? 2. Whose problem is it? 3. What new problems do we create by solving this problem? 4. Which people and institutions will be most impacted by a technological solution? 5. What changes in language occur as the result of technological change? 6. Which shifts in economic and political power might result when this technology is adopted? 7. What alternative (and unintended) uses might be made of this technology? <https://scottberkun.com/2016/the-7-questions-for-any-technological-idea/ https://scottberkun.com/2016/the-7-questions-for-any-technol...> <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=dBlfPhsrvtw https://yewtu.be/watch?v=dBlfPhsrvtw> <https://yewtu.be/hlrv7DIHllE?t=50m34s https://yewtu.be/hlrv7DIHllE?t=50m34s> From Technopoly: <https://www.worldcat.org/title/30337681 https://www.worldcat.org/title/30337681> Related: Postman's Five Laws of Technology: 1. “All technological change is a trade-off.” 2. “The advantages and disadvantages of new technologies are never distributed evenly among the population.” 3. “Embedded in every technology there is a powerful idea.” 4. “Technological change is not additive; it is ecological.” 5. “Technology tends to become mythic.” <https://pggalalis.com/postmans-five-laws-of-technology/ https://pggalalis.com/postmans-five-laws-of-technology/> (More detail at the link.)

robomartin 4y ago

Happy Flexport customer here. I'd say, yes, to a point. Maybe it depends on the definition of supply chain. Transportation is, in my opinion, a very small part of the chain. Moving atoms is very different from moving bits and bytes with software. For example, we buy custom aluminum extrusions and other custom-manufactured metal components. The design, validation, sourcing, manufacturing and inspection process is months long. Transportation is that little --important, of course-- sliver of time that happens at the very end of all of that. There's a lot more complexity in an end-to-end supply chain than most people realize. Even buying a screw isn't simple. Software can only touch some of these parts. I'd say very few of them, actually. A recent case. Custom aluminum extrusions. Flexport air-freighted the shipment for us because ocean freight would have taken a million years. The shipment was --we are told by those we contracted to do it-- inspected per our specifications. Well, the shipment was crap. We probably had to throw out half of it. It didn't matter how efficiently it got from point A to point B. The failure happened way before that. This is why very large companies have their employees on site to manage quality. If you don't operate at those scales you can be victimized in ways I cannot even begin to describe.

vonwoodson 4y ago

I’ve always felt that the greatest contribution that software development could contribute to supply chain is the UI/UX paradigm. Like so many bureaucratic systems, it requires expertise to navigate successfully. “No, I didn’t fill out the ID-10-T form, Billy told me to fill out the R3Q-WI.10 and the SF-1053R forms. And, I don’t know what to put in box 1,253-C: what is a “Problem Identification Supervisor Authorization Location NIFPIN”?… I need to go talk to Peggy? Oh, she’s out this week? (Awesome…) What? No, I didn’t… look, no I’m not getting an attitude…” proceeds to be labeled rude and has requisition “slow-walked” Meanwhile, on Amazon, I’ve accidentally bought things because it’s so damned easy to find what I want and spend my money. And, it’s easy and fun. I guess what I’m trying to say is that: computers are incredibly similar to “bureaucratic systems” in that you need to fully understand their inner workings. But, we in the software community take on great efforts to prevent the users from being exposed to all the twine and duct tape that holds the whole thing together. If supply chains were to take UI/UX seriously, businesses would be all the better for it. (Although, saying this suddenly reminds me of all the terrible SAP views and all the gross “internal use” programs we use… sigh)

hef19898 4y ago
What makes you think Amazon is fundamentally different behind what customer see?
- was_a_dev 4y ago
  The complexity of logistics hasn't changed and is no different for Amazon.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    I can confirm that. Amazon is doing it better than most others, for sure, but the effort and complexity is still there. And I'm not sure if looking up tables directly in some database (the Amazon way) and entering data through some cobbled together web interfaces (again, the Amazon way in some cases) is better UI than whatever SAP is providing. I know both, and at least in SAP everything is one place.

LightRailTycoon 4y ago

As a buyer in much smaller part of the supply chain, my experience is that no-one who uses the supply chain wants a simpler supply chain, they want to meet their business goals. If you use software to simplify your supply chain, you'll use that to do more complex things with the supply chain until the gains are erased.

a_c 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

tharne 4y ago

Theoretically, yes software could. In the real world, adding software to most things just makes them more complex and worse.

skohan 4y ago
I don't know, I think email for instance compares pretty favorably to the alternative.