Research

Every finding added up comes to ₹9.7 Cr, but the claimable figure is ₹9.1 Cr. The difference is ₹60 L of saving counted twice: capture, matching, receiving and discount capture all move one invoice through one process, so fixing any of them takes some of the same money the others were promising. Separately from both, ₹18.2 Cr of cash sits in stock that is not needed. That is a one-off release rather than an annual saving, so it never joins the line above, and a CFO who hears the two added together stops trusting the rest. Nothing on this page is measured from the client's own data.

Everything between an invoice arriving and money leaving the bank. Four findings sit here, worth ₹2.3 Cr a year, which is 23% of everything found. The biggest single one is worth ₹1 Cr: early-payment discounts are going uncollected. It is the bucket with the most findings and the most confirmed ones, so it is the safest place to open a conversation. It is also where the overlap sits: these four move one invoice through one process, so their savings cannot all be banked.

Choosing suppliers, agreeing rates, and getting them set up to trade. Three findings sit here, worth ₹3.3 Cr a year, which is 34% of everything found. The biggest single one is worth ₹2.1 Cr: indirect spend bought outside negotiated rates. This is the bucket a plant manager feels rather than a finance team, which makes it the easiest to get agreement on and the hardest to price from their own data.

Freight, warehousing, and how much inventory sits still. Four findings sit here, worth ₹3.5 Cr a year, which is 36% of everything found. The biggest single one is worth ₹1.6 Cr: freight is tendered manually, one carrier per lane. The weakest evidence on the page. Both of the large findings here are inferred from the FY25 report rather than observed, because nobody in logistics or planning has been spoken to.

Claims owed to Suvarna by distributors and suppliers. One findings sit here, worth ₹68 L a year, which is 7% of everything found. The biggest single one is worth ₹68 L: distributor claims are reconciled by hand. One finding, and the only one in this bucket. Money owed to Suvarna rather than money Suvarna is losing, which makes it the easiest to raise and the least urgent to fix.

A total is only a total of what was looked at, and this one covers 3 of the 5 stages of the operation. Source is where the work has been done: 9 of the 12 findings sit in it. Make and Return have not been researched at all, and Make is the one that should worry you: three plants, and not one question asked about them. Yield and giveaway on ₹713 Cr of material is normally the largest line on an agri-processor's board, and it is worth ₹3.6 to ₹10.7 Cr a year on a sector range of 0.5 to 1.5%. None of that is in the number above.

One of the 12 findings carries no rupee figure, and that is a result rather than a hole. no supplier scorecard behind goods-receipt rejections is real and worth raising, but nothing behind it supports a number: there is no rejection data, so any figure would be a guess wearing a decimal point. Two more areas were looked at and produced nothing. Returns and reverse logistics has not been researched, and export documentation was checked and came back clean. A finding with no price is more honest than a price with no base.

Last on purpose, because none of it is a finding. ₹1,150 Cr of revenue in FY25, up 18% on the year before, on a procurement process that has not changed since 2019: that is the sentence the whole argument rests on, because it says the volume grew and the machine did not. Every price above is a percentage of one of these numbers rather than of a guess, which is what makes the total challengeable in the right way. The full version, with what each figure should be measured against and where it came from, is on Business context.