Hundreds of warehousing and fulfilment requests have been published on Zendeq. We followed six of them from the first brief to the final quotes, including the questions providers asked, the rates they returned and the reasons customers gave for picking one party over another<\/a>. Below is what those six searches showed. Every case is anonymised and the rates are the ones that were actually quoted.<\/p>\n One brief for a small, light consumer product produced seven comparable quotes. Same product, same volumes, same two destination countries, same three day service level.<\/p>\n Pick and pack ranged from \u20ac0.99 to \u20ac2.95 per order. Parcel rates to the same country ranged from \u20ac6.12 to \u20ac15.00. The total cost of shipping one single item order, parcel included, ran from \u20ac7.32 at the cheapest provider to \u20ac20.70 at the most expensive.<\/p>\n The handling rate is the line most brands negotiate hardest, and it is the smaller and more stable half of the bill. The parcel rate varies by a factor of two or more between providers, because it depends on the carrier contracts each one holds and the volume they push through them. Ask for the total cost of one representative order to your main destination countries, with the parcel included. Our overview of transport costs in the Netherlands<\/a> gives you a reference point.<\/p>\n In the same search, the quotes that held up came from providers who declined to price the work on the first description. Their questions were consistent: dimensions and weight per SKU, what the assembly involves step by step, packaging type, the return rate, inbound frequency, the go live date and the required system integration.<\/p>\n Two questions did most of the work. The first was the order profile. The brief said orders of up to five items, and one provider replied that up to five is not a profile. What it needed was the split: roughly sixty per cent single item, twenty five per cent two items, the rest three or more. The second was the share of orders per destination country, which determines the carrier mix and therefore the parcel rate.<\/p>\n A quote made without those two answers is provisional, and it is usually revised after go live.<\/p>\n A brand shipping around fifteen hundred orders a week was asked for orders per month per country and a twelve to twenty four month forecast. It answered seven of the nine data points the same day and declined those two, since it was not willing to hand country level sales data to a dozen companies it had not selected, several of which serve competitors.<\/p>\n Both positions are reasonable. There are three ways through it. Give the country mix as percentages instead of volumes. Give one representative week, or an order profile per thousand orders, that every provider works against. State in your first message that the absolute forecast follows for the shortlist under a mutual non disclosure agreement. Providers accept a staged disclosure when they know the stages in advance.<\/p>\n That same brand closed its request the day after publishing, once several conversations were running. Running three or four properly is usually more productive than running twelve.<\/p>\n In a dangerous goods search, the customer visited an established warehousing group with the right licences, a compliant building and a clear quotation, and then chose another provider. The letter explaining the decision listed six reasons:<\/p>\n Five of the six have nothing to do with price, and none of them would surface in a tender that asks about square metres, certifications and rates. Cut off times, how many carriers call at the site each day, and whether the provider picks single items or moves pallets are what separate two equally qualified companies.<\/p>\n Response counts say something about the market and little about fit. The light e-commerce brief above drew twenty three providers asking for contact details. A bonded warehousing brief that required a customs warehouse authorisation, transit handling and the willingness to work under the customer’s own name drew two.<\/p>\n Sixty to a hundred pallet positions is a small requirement in square metres and a demanding one in permissions, and few providers hold that combination. Judge a compliance heavy shortlist on the authorisations providers hold.<\/p>\n The usual advice is to compare pick and pack rates. For a launch with a long inbound lead time that advice does not hold.<\/p>\n One regulated healthcare launch modelled a few hundred orders a month against a handful of container arrivals a year and up to a couple of hundred pallet positions at peak, most of it long term reserve stock. On that profile the storage rate, the cost of unloading containers and the monthly minimum during ramp up determine the bill, and the pick rate has almost no effect.<\/p>\n The container profile adds to it. Goods arriving floor loaded, as several hundred loose cartons rather than on pallets, are unloaded by hand, checked and palletised. Ask for that to be quoted per container against your real carton count, and ask what happens when cartons arrive without readable SKU, batch or barcode information, since that adds manual registration work.<\/p>\n Across these searches, storage was quoted per pallet per week, per pallet per month and per pallet per day, and assembly work was quoted both per hour and per item.<\/p>\n Converted to one unit, \u20ac0.35 per pallet per day and \u20ac2.50 per pallet per week come out the same, while \u20ac5.95 per pallet per week is more than double both. Assembly at around \u20ac40 to \u20ac42.50 per hour worked out at roughly \u20ac0.50 to \u20ac0.70 per order on the profile in question, against one provider that quoted \u20ac0.50 per item. Convert everything to one unit before you compare, and ask each provider to express their hourly rate as a rate per order, since they know their own throughput. Our comparison of pallet storage rates<\/a> shows the usual ranges, and warehouse types<\/a> explains why bulk and racked storage are priced differently.<\/p>\n Behind the per order rates in that seven quote comparison sat a \u20ac1,000 minimum monthly warehouse fee at one provider, account management fees of \u20ac275 and \u20ac400 at two others, a \u20ac169 monthly system licence and setup fees between \u20ac280 and \u20ac1,150.<\/p>\n At eight thousand orders a month those amounts disappear into the rate. At one thousand orders a month, a \u20ac1,000 minimum on its own adds a euro to every order. Ask for the monthly bill at launch volume as well as at target volume.<\/p>\n The most complete intake we saw came from a provider responding to a regulated healthcare brief. Before quoting, it asked which legal entity acts as importer, whether the customer held the Dutch VAT and EORI registrations and a customs partner, which incoterms applied, and for the full product file including CE documentation, the declaration of conformity, unique device identification where applicable, and the details of the manufacturer and the authorised representative. It also wanted the split of regulatory responsibility recorded before starting.<\/p>\n Then came the operational questions. Which temperature and humidity limits apply, in numbers. Whether monitoring has to be continuous or whether periodic checks with exception reporting are sufficient. Whether physically segregated storage is required or a defined zone controlled by the warehouse system is enough. At which level batch registration is needed, from pallet down to individual shipment. The maximum response time on a recall. Whether unopened returns can be made saleable again, and who decides to release, block or destroy.<\/p>\n Continuous monitoring, segregated storage and shipment level batch traceability each carry a cost. Take the answers from your own quality file. Brands often specify a more expensive operation than their documentation requires.<\/p>\n One brief involved pallets averaging just over a tonne, in seven different footprints, several of them wider than a standard pallet location.<\/p>\n On that profile, ask for the rated floor load per square metre and the rated load per pallet position, in writing. Ask how each of your footprints will be stored, and whether the quoted storage rate is per physical location or per standard pallet equivalent, since those are different numbers for oversized goods. Ask for outbound rates by weight bracket per destination country instead of an average, and check where the bracket boundaries fall relative to your typical shipment.<\/p>\n State whether your forecast is a commitment. Providers price differently against a volume commitment, and correcting that later costs more than the conversation now. One brief said plainly that its figures were a planning forecast and no minimum, which is the right way to handle it.<\/p>\n If you have no confirmed start date, publish a decision date: the day by which you will have chosen. A warehouse asked to reserve a few hundred pallet positions plans capacity against that almost as well as against a go live date.<\/p>\n If you are still sizing the operation, our guide to e-commerce fulfilment in the Netherlands<\/a> includes a cost calculator, warehousing in the Netherlands<\/a> covers the market itself, and Article 23 and fiscal representation<\/a> explains the import VAT setup you need before your first shipment lands.<\/p>\nWant quotes like these for your own operation? Tell us what you need<\/a> and Dutch providers respond directly.<\/strong>Seven quotes on one brief<\/h2>\n
What providers ask before they quote<\/h2>\n
Sharing data with providers<\/h2>\n
Why one certified warehouse was rejected<\/h2>\n
\n
How many responses to expect<\/h2>\n
Which cost lines matter for your profile<\/h2>\n
Comparing rates that use different units<\/h2>\n
Fixed costs and minimum fees<\/h2>\n
Regulated goods: what to prepare<\/h2>\n
Heavy pallets and non standard sizes<\/h2>\n
Forecasts and start dates<\/h2>\n
Before you go to the market<\/h2>\n
\n
\n