The first part of the result tab shows a summary of all the costs that has been estimated. In the column named “Given price” you can see what profit percentage the supplier enjoys if basing the costs on your estimations and the suppliers quoted price, in this case a hefty 14.4% profit. This is highly dependant on what overhead mode you have chosen in the overhead tab. In the examples % In-House Value-Added + Raw material was chosen due to the significant value of the purchased component, value that is not added at the supplier. Therefore it would be missleading to base the overhead and profit calculations on the total cost.
Further input that can be used here is scrap, transport and packaging. Depending on what kind of distribution one chooses transport and packaging can have different values, if quoted Ex-Works Autoliv picks up the material. The interesting factor is scrap that is most often overlooked in the RFQ as the format does not support it fully. The raw material already has scrap included but for the processes this is not the case, scrap is one of those great by-products of doing a Run@Rate. The scrap value can hold substantial significance the further down in the process that the scrap happens due to the added value up to that point and should therefore not be overlooked when trying to find an actual cost of a part.
Looking at the sums “Sum: Total” is as one can suspect the sum of all cost posts above. “Sum: In-House Value Added + Raw material” disregards purchased components and subcontracting costs as these costs are adding value outside of the suppliers own activities. “Sum: In-House Value Added” takes away raw material impact as well, this can be suitable if no material is used in the process, for instance in a pure assembly of purchased components.