We don’t think in silos. We optimize the balance sheet to reduce run-rate costs and increase EBITDA. By marginally increasing acquisition costs to accommodate fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles, we cut fuel spend by 37.5%—and set a path toward $5.6M in savings.
The Challenge
Trigger
Eroding margins due to fuel spend.
Status Quo
Procurement and Finance teams looked at vehicle price in isolation, not in the context of the total lifecycle.
Perceived Need vs. Actual Need
PortCo leadership was reluctant to increase acquisition cost, even if it meant greater long-term savings.
and Environment
Pressure
The PE sponsor wanted improvements in both EBITDA and ESG positioning.
Operational Readiness
The PortCo lacked the strategic perspective to see the P&L and balance sheet implications of vehicle acquisition.
The JAI Approach
Embedded
We worked alongside leadership to reframe “more expensive vehicles” as strategic investments in reducing operating costs.
Tactical and Strategic
Modeled total cost of ownership (TCO) scenarios comparing traditional vs. hybrid vehicles—including fuel, maintenance, and residual value.
Curious
We looked past the cost data and asked, “What about hybrid vehicles?”
The Turning Point
During a board-level conversation, our TCO analysis showed that a marginal increase in acquisition cost would drive a 37.5% reduction in fuel spend—and a projected cumulative savings of $5.6M.
Results
Savings
37.5% reduction in fuel spend, and a projected path to $5.6M savings.
Efficiency
The PortCo’s fleet mix shifted toward hybrids and other, more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Behavior Shift
Finance and Procurement started making fleet decisions based on potential P&L and balance-sheet impact—not just cost.
