1
00:00:00,100 --> 00:00:06,700
Hello Puma team, I am Wallie. When supply is limited, the allocation decision matters even more.

2
00:00:07,534 --> 00:00:13,334
Your strongest products and most important sizes may compete for the same available stock.

3
00:00:14,167 --> 00:00:20,117
Let us make that choice visible, so your team can see the recommendation and influence the tradeoff.

4
00:00:20,934 --> 00:00:31,359
Here is a real constrained recommendation across three destinations: 347 units are proposed against a need for 979.

5
00:00:32,134 --> 00:00:41,309
Focus on size S. The warehouse holds 37 physical units, while the recommendation distributes them as one, one, and thirty-five.

6
00:00:42,100 --> 00:00:50,200
At the third destination, 35 units are proposed, but another 351 are still needed to reach the stock target.

7
00:00:50,934 --> 00:00:58,934
The choice is visible before approval. Your team can review how scarce stock is distributed and which demand remains uncovered.

8
00:00:59,734 --> 00:01:07,409
Now look across the size range at that destination. The total alone would hide very different stock positions and targets.

9
00:01:08,167 --> 00:01:13,217
For size S, there is no stock on hand, and ten units are already in transit.

10
00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:21,850
The target is 396. After counting the incoming stock, the remaining need is 386 units.

11
00:01:22,634 --> 00:01:30,584
The explanation puts those inputs beside the proposed quantity, giving your team a concrete starting point for the size decision.

12
00:01:31,334 --> 00:01:38,459
Suppose your planner wants to hold one unit back. We reduce the size S proposal from 35 to 34.

13
00:01:39,234 --> 00:01:48,734
The proposal total falls to 346. At this destination, the remaining size S need increases to 352.

14
00:01:49,500 --> 00:01:56,125
We save that change for review. Saving keeps the decision in the proposal workflow, ready for approval.

15
00:01:56,900 --> 00:02:04,550
Your team can discuss the tradeoff using the same quantities: what is covered, what is held back, and what still needs attention.

16
00:02:05,800 --> 00:02:09,200
For Puma, I would agree three decisions with your team.

17
00:02:10,034 --> 00:02:17,559
When supply is short, what wins: expected sales, service level, a launch commitment, or a minimum size presence?

18
00:02:18,400 --> 00:02:23,300
Should size demand be reviewed by store, store group, or another planning level?

19
00:02:24,100 --> 00:02:29,650
And when a planner changes the recommendation, which tradeoffs should require an extra review?

20
00:02:30,500 --> 00:02:36,375
With those choices clear, limited supply becomes a decision your team can explain and own.