Customer / SKU commitments
List qualified recipes, packages, contracted campaign windows and release conditions. A production transfer may require customer review even if the same equipment is retained.
Beverage co-packing plant relocation
Beverage co-packing plant relocation.
Keep customer supply in the plan.
Compare equipment reuse, customer-qualified products, receiving-site readiness, inventory cover and the full transition cost of moving a beverage co-packer.
How DPS can scope the process and investment decision.
Start with the business outcome
A beverage co-packer moves more than machines. Customer recipes, package tooling, material ownership, records and service commitments must transfer with the production system. DPS can coordinate site / equipment interfaces and project delivery while the owner and specialists retain customer qualification and product-release duties. Value comes from a viable transfer with controlled total cost, rather than assumed annual profit from moving the same line.
Agree rigging, transport, preservation, destination work, specialist OEM support and customer / product qualification responsibilities. Customer-owned ingredients and packaging are not automatically the co-packer’s saleable inventory or avoided cash cost.
Beverage co-packing plant relocation: product and operating requirements.
Material and inventory ownership
Separate owned stock from customer-owned ingredients, packaging and finished goods. Define usable cover, storage / shelf-life limits, lot identity and dispatch responsibility.
Destination and equipment fit
Verify retained package condition, controls support, access, utilities, cleaning and local interfaces. A delivered filler is not a restarted qualified co-packing operation.
Beverage co-packing plant relocation: compare process and equipment options.
Build product-specific service cover with qualified inventory or external production, where feasible.
Map commitmentsRecipes, formats, timing and ownership.
Confirm usable coverQualified stock, storage and dispatch.
Define uncovered exposureUse real contribution, not revenue.
Agree transition gatesCustomer and owner readiness.
Resolve before procurementInventory cover must be feasible for the actual product, shelf life, package and customer.
Freeze destination interfaces before removing production equipment.
Survey retained assetsCondition, identifiers and OEM records.
Verify receiving siteUtilities, access, routes and cleaning.
Preserve and moveQualified trade / transport boundaries.
Inspect on receiptCondition and interface completeness.
Resolve before procurementDo not remove a working asset before the destination-ready gate is met.
Coordinate utilities, controls, package tooling and representative production trials.
Restore infrastructureRequired utility and control conditions.
Test interfacesOEM, upstream and downstream states.
Run representative SKUsProduct / package and record evidence.
Release to serviceOwner / customer-approved handover.
Resolve before procurementMechanical completion does not establish accepted customer production.
Equipment duties, utilities and supplier responsibilities.
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| System | Operating duty | Relevant DPS guide | Confirm before purchase |
|---|---|---|---|
| Process engineering | Turn measured requirements into an interface and duty specification. | Process engineering ↗ | Actual product envelope, baseline data, qualified trials and responsibilities. |
| OEM and field interfaces | Connect the selected equipment to the existing operating train. | Installation & integration ↗ | Mechanical, electrical, software, site access and integrated acceptance. |
| Instrumentation and controls | Execute the agreed sequence and record meaningful equipment states. | Automation & controls ↗ | I/O, alarms, recipe authority, backups and acceptance tests. |
| Utility supply and return | Meet the duty where the process actually uses it. | Utility infrastructure ↗ | Peak overlap, recovery, quality, point-of-use conditions and isolation. |
Co-packer relocation: reuse plan vs shorter-exposure plan.
Original hypothetical USD alternatives on the same destination and future operating basis. The annual ROI preset costs Plan B and deliberately assumes no recurring benefit.
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| Cash boundary | Plan A | Plan B |
|---|---|---|
| Defined move / equipment scope | 450,000 | 650,000 |
| Separate destination work | 250,000 | 250,000 |
| 15% capital contingency | 105,000 | 135,000 |
| Uncovered contribution loss + other transition | 910,000 | 550,000 |
| Working capital | 100,000 | 100,000 |
| Initial transition cash | 1,815,000 | 1,685,000 |
| One-time difference | Reference | 130,000 lower total cost |
Customer supply exposure, retained package uncertainty and operating value.
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| Observed condition | Measure before design | DPS / team decision | Economic basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Customer supply exposure | Map usable product-specific cover. | Sequence transfer and temporary capacity. | Uncovered lost contribution once. |
| Retained package uncertainty | Inspect condition and current support. | Compare reuse / refurbishment / new packages. | Complete transition cost and future operating differences. |
| Unready receiving facility | Track utilities, construction and interfaces. | Set destination-ready gates. | Avoidable one-time delay and temporary-service cost. |
| Lost recipe / lot continuity | Map records, tooling and authority. | Coordinate controls and responsible release. | Usable operating evidence; no invented recall saving. |
Compare operating corrections, retrofit and replacement.
Inspect retained equipment, tooling, software and supplier support; prepare the receiving facility before removal. Compare the full transfer against customer-qualified supply cover and required restart evidence.
Investment boundaryInclude dismantling, preservation, transport, destination connections, refurbishment and customer trials. The displayed Plan B has zero recurring benefit; its financial value is the one-time total-cost difference against Plan A.
Where technically and commercially feasible, install and test selected new packages at the receiving site while the original operation serves customers. Confirm OEM lead times, customer qualification and destination readiness.
Investment boundaryInclude new packages, both-site overlap, inventory, trials, decommissioning and uncovered transition exposure. Compare complete transition cash and future operating costs; retained book value is not an avoided cash purchase.
Beverage co-packing relocation cost: move, restart and customer cover.
Compare proposals with the same product duty, supplier boundaries and acceptance basis. The amount below is a transparent planning example, not a market price range, supplier estimate or DPS quotation.
| Cost bucket | Assumed amount |
|---|---|
| Asset survey / destination interface engineering | $75,000 |
| Removal, preservation and transport | $150,000 |
| Reinstallation and site connections | $220,000 |
| Controls restoration and package interfaces | $75,000 |
| Commissioning and agreed customer-trial support | $80,000 |
| Documentation, training and closeout | $50,000 |
| Defined project scope | $650,000 |
| Separate site / facility additions | $250,000 |
| Capital contingency (15%) | $135,000 |
| Separate one-time startup / shutdown cost | $550,000 |
| Incremental working capital | $100,000 |
| Total initial cash | $1,685,000 |
The defined scope assumes applicable freight, procurement charges and taxes are included in the owner’s estimate. Add missing civil, land / shell, OEM, environmental, validation and permitting costs explicitly. Site and field conditions, duty, production access and quoted supplier scope determine actual price. Financing is excluded.
Worked operating case
Hypothetical screening case: 250 days × 0 equivalent useful hour/day × 0 accepted kg/h × 0% realization, capped at 0 kg incremental demand, gives 0 additional sold kg/year. Net price $0/kg less incremental variable cost $0/kg gives $0/kg contribution. Verified baseline purchase savings are $0, realized payroll savings $0, energy $0, cleaning resources $0 and maintenance $0 per year. Deduct $0 additional annual fixed cost. The selected shorter Plan B has zero recurring benefit. Its $550,000 startup boundary includes 96 uncovered hours × $5,000 contribution/hour = $480,000 plus $70,000 separate transition cost. The defined capital includes a $200,000 execution premium; with 15% contingency that premium is $230,000. The worksheet therefore reconciles to a $130,000 one-time alternative advantage, not an annual saving.
Calculated from these assumptions: steady annual net benefit $0; year-one net cash $0; cash payback Beyond 5 years; five-year NPV at 10% is −$1,685,000. Change the assumptions below to test a different case.
Relocation total cash and one-time outage alternatives.
Replace the illustrative inputs with your own measured or quoted values. The five-year pre-tax model uses good kilograms, demand-capped contribution and separately verified baseline savings; it is not a project quotation.
This essential-project default costs the defined scope and assumes zero recurring benefit. Compare feasible alternatives and one-time execution exposure. Add annual benefits only when a separately evidenced change in future operating cash exists.
- Initial cash investment
- $1.69M
- Steady annual net benefit
- $0.0k
- Cash payback
- Beyond 5 years
- 5-year NPV
- −$1.69M
- Steady annual cash ROI
- 0.0%
- 5-year net cash ROI
- -100.0%
Includes contingency, startup and working capital
Incremental operating cash before tax
Includes year-one ramp assumption
At 10% annual discount
Net annual benefit ÷ initial cash
Net cumulative gain ÷ initial cash
Modeled incremental sales: 0 kg/year at $0.00/kg contribution. The base case does not recover the required discounted return within five years. Year-one net cash: $0.
Realization needed for the target operating payback
Not feasible
Demand, time, contribution or other cash benefits cannot meet the 4-year target under these assumptions.
CSV export is local. No inputs are submitted.
Cumulative project cash
BaseDownside
Swipe the chart to compare all five years ↔
Inspect annual cash flow and sensitivity
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| Year | Net cash | Cumulative cash | Discounted cash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | −$1,685,000 | −$1,685,000 | −$1,685,000 |
| Year 1 | $0 | −$1,685,000 | $0 |
| Year 2 | $0 | −$1,685,000 | $0 |
| Year 3 | $0 | −$1,685,000 | $0 |
| Year 4 | $0 | −$1,685,000 | $0 |
| Year 5 | $0 | −$1,685,000 | $0 |
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| Case | Annual benefit | NPV | Cash payback |
|---|---|---|---|
| Downside | $0 | −$1,892,000 | Beyond 5 years |
| Base | $0 | −$1,685,000 | Beyond 5 years |
| Upside | $0 | −$1,685,000 | Beyond 5 years |
Downside: installed and site costs +20%, realization ×0.75 and unit contribution reduced by 20% of its absolute value. Upside: realization ×1.15, capped at 100%, and unit contribution improved by 10% of its absolute value. The demand ceiling still applies.
Formulas, scope and double-counting rules
Initial cash = (defined project scope + site additions) × (1 + contingency) + separate startup / shutdown cost + working capital. Contingency is conservatively treated as spent initially.
Sold incremental kg = min(days × recovered hours/day × constrained good kg/hour × realization, incremental demand). Contribution = sold incremental kg × (net price − incremental variable cost). New-volume labor, energy and packaging belong in that variable cost.
Baseline material benefit uses the verified percentage of actual purchases avoided at unchanged accepted baseline output. It is not a direct subtraction of two loss rates. Count a recovered kilogram once, either as its applicable cash saving or as incremental contribution.
Net annual benefit = contribution + independently realized baseline cash savings − added fixed operating cost. Year one scales gross benefits by the ramp factor while paying the full added fixed operating cost. Do not also count the same launch loss in the one-time startup amount.
Cash ROI = net annual benefit / initial cash. Five-year net ROI = (five-year cash inflows − initial cash) / initial cash. NPV = −initial cash + Σ cash flow(t)/(1 + discount rate)^t. Payback uses annual cash with linear interpolation within the recovery year. The threshold solver excludes terminal working-capital recovery.
This is a five-year screening horizon, not an asset’s entire life. No tax, debt, depreciation, grants, escalation, asset resale or additional replacement capital is modeled. Include recurring service costs in operating expense and use a detailed monthly budget for formal capital approval.
Co-packer move: reconciled one-time alternatives
Plan A has 168 uncovered hours and Plan B 96 after feasible customer cover. The $230,000 extra execution cost includes the capital premium and its contingency. Net alternative difference is $130,000 once; neither plan creates automatic annual sales.
Commissioning tests and performance acceptance.
Agree the design basis.
Use representative products, measured constraints and a documented utility / cleaning envelope. Assign each supplier and owner interface.
Test the complete sequence.
Plan FAT / SAT, instruments, recipes, permissives, quality checks and upstream / downstream handshakes as appropriate to the scope.
Verify economic realization.
After stabilization, compare matched products and operating conditions. Reconcile extra output with sales, and baseline savings with actual purchases, bills and payroll.
Published scope / project context
The published DPS case overview includes a co-packing plant relocation. It supports project-context relevance only. Another co-packer’s customer approvals, outage, site condition and costs must be assessed independently.
Compare installed scope, continuity and useful life.
Swipe horizontally to compare all columns ↔
| Decision | Targeted intervention | Broader replacement / new operation |
|---|---|---|
| Constraint | A measured gap can be corrected within retained assets. | The verified operating envelope cannot meet product, demand or reliability needs. |
| Cost scope | Include engineering, interfaces, shutdown, commissioning and retained-asset risk. | Include all new systems, site / facility work, OEMs, utilities, ramp and working capital. |
| Benefit | Only incremental contribution and genuinely avoided costs versus the current operation. | Demand-supported contribution less the full additional operating cost versus the agreed alternative. |
| Acceptance | Verify the changed duty and its effect on the complete line. | Verify the integrated new train and the owner’s readiness to operate. |
Beverage co-packing plant relocation project FAQ
Does moving a co-packing line create a payback?
Not automatically. A required move can be evaluated by total transition cost, service continuity and future operating differences. The default does not invent annual capacity or savings.
Can we use all inventory as customer cover?
Only stock that is conforming, usable for the correct customer / product / package and available within storage, shelf-life and dispatch constraints. Ownership and qualification also matter.
Why does the shorter plan’s premium include contingency?
The full alternative comparison applies 15% contingency to the assumed execution-capital premium. Excluding it from the outage worksheet would overstate the shorter plan’s one-time advantage.
Are these prices or returns a DPS commitment?
No. The example inputs exist to make the business-case calculation reviewable. Actual scope, prices, schedule, savings and performance need project-specific assessment and agreement.
What should the first DPS conversation include?
Bring the product and package mix, operating baseline, commercial target, retained assets, site constraints, available outage window and the capital options you are considering. Mark unknowns for measurement or supplier trials.
Bring an operating baseline and a testable investment brief.
Prepare the information below, export the assumptions you have modeled, and discuss the unknowns with DPS. An unmeasured input is a question to resolve, not a reason to invent precision.
Checklist and model data stay in this browser until you choose to share them.
Sources, assumptions and further reading.
DPS co-packing and project scope
DPS publishes co-packing / contract-manufacturing coverage and a co-packing relocation project context. The inventory, execution alternatives and cash amounts in this guide are original hypothetical assumptions, not that customer’s reported results.
- DPS service and equipment scope
- DPS industry overview and published project context
- Process engineering
- Installation & integration
- Automation & controls
- Utility infrastructure
Guide assumptions reviewed on 26 October 2026. Qualified site / product teams establish regulatory and food-safety requirements; this guide does not prescribe a validated process.
Related Planning Guides
Beverage Co-Packing Business Plan: Capacity, Customer Mix and Capital Requirements
Build a beverage co-packing business plan that connects customer mix, packaging formats, campaigns, capacity commitments and the required capital scope.
Expand the Existing Food Plant or Build a New Facility?
Compare expanding an existing food plant with a new facility using site fit, infrastructure, production disruption, delivered capacity and investment timing.
Food Plant Project Interface Matrix: Building, Process, Utilities and Controls
Build a food plant interface matrix covering building, process, utilities and controls, using a four-system integration lesson and explicit owners.