Metrology Capital Equipment Extended Warranty Valuation Model

Semiconductor Manufacturer (Semi) wants to improve the valuation of the extended warranties they purchase for their metrology tools and determine whether or not extended warranties are worth the financial investment. Historically, suppliers have commonly overvalued warranties. For example, there is a 50%-60% profit margin on warranties in the consumer electronics industry. The costs incurred from purchasing extended warranties contribute to millions of dollars each year in tool ownership for Semi. By creating an extended warranty valuation model, our goal is to reduce the total cost of metrology tool ownership. A different perspective on the valuation of extended warranties will lead to an increased bottom line for Semi. Our valuation model will assist in determining warranty purchase pricing and appropriate service levels of maintenance personnel associated with the extended warranties. The model's objective is to compare the statistical expected total cost of buying tool parts on an "as needed" basis with the quoted price of an extended warranty. It will assess the strict financial value of either buying or not buying the extended warranty. Using actual tool part consumption data, the model can quickly evaluate the value of a supplier's warranty offer. In addition, the results from the model can be used as a negotiation tool with the suppliers. However the model will have its limitations. For example, the model will not be able to evaluate whether a metrology supplier relies on extended warranty revenues to fund research and development or whether a supplier has the financial health to remain in business with the loss of extended warranty related revenues. A shift in extended warranty purchasing by Semi could have a profound impact on the number of competitive suppliers in the future, and Semi's managers should take this into account when altering their extended warranty purchasing strategy. Our model can be utilized for three different functions: negotiating with suppliers, simplifying the decision to buy or not buy an extended warranty and influencing managers' purchasing strategies. Changing the service level costs of labor can impact Semi's decision to buy or not the extended warranty due to its effect on the probability of the warranty being a good or bad deal. In addition, the model output can significantly influence a manager's purchasing strategy within the organization by breaking down the cost savings associated with the metrology tools' part failures. In order to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of the financial model, we recommend that Semi collect and assemble the model input data in a different manner. Although it is possible Semi does collect more detailed data, the input data we received needed to be more comprehensive; it should include a list of tool parts with their respective failure dates, along with which supplier is responsible for which tool. Furthermore, Semi should develop a supplier scorecard to account for financial health, which can be factored into the model. This will result in a more precise evaluation on whether or not an extended warranty is worth the financial investment.