2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2014.08.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the economic consequences of letting a supplier hold reserve storage

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 16 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our setting, the mainstream (long‐leadtime) supplier is needed only because the local supplier does not have sufficient capacity, whereas in the dual sourcing literature, the long‐leadtime supplier could be preferred because it is lower cost. Abginehchi, Larsen, and Thorstenson () also consider a capacity‐constrained responsive supply, but this supply source is a fixed quantity reserve inventory that is more expensive than the normal supplier. The decision studied is also different from our setting in that the buyer either uses the entire reserve inventory or none of it.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our setting, the mainstream (long‐leadtime) supplier is needed only because the local supplier does not have sufficient capacity, whereas in the dual sourcing literature, the long‐leadtime supplier could be preferred because it is lower cost. Abginehchi, Larsen, and Thorstenson () also consider a capacity‐constrained responsive supply, but this supply source is a fixed quantity reserve inventory that is more expensive than the normal supplier. The decision studied is also different from our setting in that the buyer either uses the entire reserve inventory or none of it.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%