Key Points
- Miebach helped a European pharmaceutical manufacturer redesign a fragmented logistics network spanning the Benelux, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.
- Consultancy.uk reported on 14 September 2026 that the project identified €18 million in potential annual savings through network rationalisation and sourcing leverage.
- The pharmaceutical company’s logistics network had expanded through several acquisitions, leaving legacy operations running in parallel.
- The original network consisted of 16 outsourced warehouses and more than 25 logistics service providers (LSPs) covering warehousing and distribution.
- Miebach designed a future network of eight outsourced warehouses, representing a 50% reduction in the outsourced warehouse footprint.
- More than 20 LSPs were screened during a structured tender covering warehousing and transportation.
- The tender was divided into three regional lots: Germany and Austria; Spain, Italy, France and the Benelux; and the United Kingdom.
- Miebach ultimately recommended a streamlined partner landscape of five LSPs, including distribution.
- The redesigned network continued to serve approximately 25,000 delivery points.
- The pharmaceutical operation continued to handle around 2,500 stock keeping units (SKUs) under controlled-temperature conditions.
- The project took six months end-to-end, according to Miebach’s case study.
- Richard Nachar, Senior Consultant at Miebach, said the project focused on removing redundancy created by acquisitions, reducing the number of LSPs and strengthening centralisation and governance.
- The resulting network was designed to balance cost, resilience, service performance and the operational requirements of both B2B and B2C channels.
The European pharmaceutical manufacturer engaged Miebach after several acquisitions had left its logistics infrastructure fragmented across six markets. Consultancy.uk reported that the resulting redesign reduced the outsourced warehouse footprint from 16 sites to eight and the logistics provider landscape from more than 25 providers to five, while identifying potential annual savings of €18 million. Miebach’s own case study confirms that the six-month project maintained coverage of approximately 25,000 delivery points and controlled-temperature handling for around 2,500 SKUs.
Why did the pharmaceutical company need to redesign its European logistics network?
As reported by Consultancy.uk on 14 September 2026, the pharmaceutical manufacturer operated across the Benelux, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. Several acquisitions had expanded the business but had also created a complex logistics structure in which legacy arrangements continued operating alongside newer networks.
According to Consultancy.uk, the resulting structure created overlapping coverage, limited opportunities for cross-country synergies and a high degree of operational complexity. The existing network contained 16 outsourced warehouses and more than 25 logistics service providers involved in warehousing and distribution.
Miebach’s case study similarly states that the acquisitions left the pharmaceutical manufacturer with a fragmented European logistics network. The company needed to reduce cost and complexity while retaining the service levels required to support pharmaceutical distribution across multiple markets.
The challenge was therefore not simply to reduce the number of facilities or logistics partners. The redesigned structure needed to remain operationally viable while protecting service requirements, including temperature-controlled distribution.
How did Miebach approach the logistics optimisation project?
According to Miebach’s case study, the consultancy began with a top-down network design intended to provide transparency over the existing footprint and establish an optimal future-state network across Europe.
Richard Nachar, Senior Consultant at Miebach, explained in the account cited by Consultancy.uk that the project was intended to optimise the network footprint and eliminate redundancy created through acquisitions. Nachar also said the consultancy sought to reduce the number of logistics service providers to support greater centralisation and governance.
A structured tender covering warehousing and transportation formed a central part of the process. Rather than relying exclusively on large international providers, Miebach assessed both local specialists and larger multi-country logistics companies.
Miebach’s case study states that more than 20 logistics service providers were screened for the tender longlist. The process was structured to create competition and transparency while taking operational feasibility and service reliability into account.
Why did Miebach avoid a one-size-fits-all European network?
A major feature of the project was the decision not to impose identical structural changes on every country.
According to Consultancy.uk and Miebach, some existing arrangements were retained because individual markets had specific requirements. These included tax considerations and service needs that made a complete restructuring inappropriate in certain locations.
The resulting approach aimed to balance standardisation with local requirements. Rather than pursuing the lowest possible facility count regardless of operational circumstances, Miebach designed a network intended to combine cost efficiency with resilience and service performance.
The target network consisted of eight outsourced warehouses. Five were awarded through the tender process, either as new third-party logistics solutions or as re-awarded operations, while three existing warehouses were retained for local market requirements.
Miebach specifically identifies Switzerland as an example of a market where an existing warehouse was retained because of local requirements.
How was the European logistics tender structured?
Miebach divided the tender into three regional lots.
Lot 1 covered Germany and Austria. Lot 2 covered Spain, Italy, France and the Benelux. Lot 3 focused on the United Kingdom.
The structure was intended to reflect the different characteristics of the markets involved while encouraging participation from both local logistics specialists and international providers.
Miebach’s case study says the evaluation process considered commercial competitiveness alongside operational feasibility and service reliability. This was particularly important because the pharmaceutical network handled products requiring controlled-temperature conditions.
The tender ran for six months from end to end, according to Miebach.
For a pharmaceutical supply chain, the tendering process therefore involved more than negotiating logistics costs. Provider capability, distribution reach, reliability and the ability to meet temperature-control requirements were also relevant to the final network design.
What happened to the number of warehouses?
The most significant structural change was the reduction in the outsourced warehouse footprint.
The original network contained 16 outsourced warehouses. The future network designed through the Miebach project contained eight. That represents a 50% reduction in the number of outsourced warehouse locations.
The reduction was achieved through a combination of network redesign, tendering and the removal of overlapping arrangements created by acquisitions.
However, the reduction did not mean that every existing facility was eliminated. Miebach retained three warehouses where local requirements made continuation appropriate, while five warehouses were awarded through the tender process.
This approach allowed the pharmaceutical manufacturer to simplify its European infrastructure without disregarding market-specific operational needs.
How many logistics service providers were retained?
The logistics partner landscape was reduced even more sharply than the warehouse footprint.
The original structure involved more than 25 logistics service providers across warehousing and distribution. Miebach’s final recommendation reduced that landscape to five LSPs in total, including distribution.
Richard Nachar told Consultancy.uk that reducing the number of LSPs was intended to support greater centralisation and governance. The resulting structure was also designed to make the network easier to manage.
Miebach’s case study describes the five-provider model as a leaner partner landscape capable of maintaining the reach required for omnichannel fulfilment across Western Europe.
The reduction in providers was consequently presented as a means of lowering fragmentation rather than simply cutting supplier numbers.
How much could the pharmaceutical company save?
According to Consultancy.uk, the project identified €18 million in potential annual savings.
Miebach’s own case study also records €18 million in potential savings per year. The consultancy attributes the savings potential to the rationalisation of the logistics footprint and the greater sourcing leverage generated by the tender process.
The figure represents potential annual savings rather than a claim that €18 million had already been realised as cash savings. This distinction is important because the project outcome described by Miebach is a redesigned network with identified savings potential.
Alongside the financial opportunity, the project reduced structural complexity by halving the outsourced warehouse footprint and consolidating the logistics provider base.
How did the redesign protect pharmaceutical service requirements?
Cost reduction was only one element of the project.
The redesigned network continued to cover approximately 25,000 delivery points, according to both Consultancy.uk and Miebach. The network also continued to support around 2,500 SKUs under controlled-temperature conditions. Miebach specifies a controlled-temperature range of 15–25°C in its case study.
These requirements made service continuity a central consideration in the network redesign.
The company also needed to continue serving both business-to-business and business-to-consumer channels. Miebach said the resulting structure was intended to safeguard those service requirements while creating a more scalable and manageable European logistics network.
The project therefore combined network simplification with the need to preserve pharmaceutical distribution capabilities.
What did Richard Nachar say about the project?
Nachar said the project was designed to optimise the network footprint and remove redundancy resulting from inorganic growth. He also described the need to reduce the number of LSPs to improve centralisation and governance and explained that Miebach used a structured tender to identify suitaRichard Nachar, Senior Consultant at Miebach, was the principal named Miebach representative quoted in Consultancy.uk’s report.
As reported by Consultancy.uk, the tender was awarded to selected partners from a longlist that included local and multi-country providers.
Miebach’s case study identifies Richard Nachar as a Senior Consultant based in the United Kingdom and names him as the contact associated with the project.
Following completion of the project, Nachar said the redesigned network provided a more scalable and easier-to-manage European logistics structure while protecting service requirements for both B2B and B2C channels.
What does the project mean for European pharmaceutical logistics?
The project illustrates the operational consequences that can arise when companies expand through acquisitions without fully integrating their logistics networks.
In this case, inherited logistics arrangements continued in parallel, resulting in overlapping coverage and a large number of warehouses and service providers. Miebach’s intervention focused on addressing that fragmentation through network modelling, regional tendering and consolidation.
The resulting structure reduced the number of outsourced warehouses from 16 to eight and the logistics provider landscape from more than 25 to five. At the same time, approximately 25,000 delivery points remained covered and controlled-temperature requirements for approximately 2,500 SKUs were maintained.
The project also demonstrates the role of structured procurement and Logistics and Supply Chain expertise in evaluating complex multi-country networks. For organisations dealing with warehousing, transportation, outsourcing and network redesign, the case highlights the importance of combining commercial analysis with operational and service considerations.
For professionals responsible for pharmaceutical logistics, network planning and supplier management, the project provides a practical example of how Logistics and Supply Chain knowledge can be applied to reduce complexity while maintaining distribution requirements.
What are the key outcomes of Miebach’s project?
The final outcome was a substantially simplified European logistics network.
Miebach reported potential annual savings of €18 million, a reduction in outsourced warehouses from 16 to eight, and a reduction in logistics service providers from more than 25 to five. The network continued to cover approximately 25,000 delivery points and approximately 2,500 SKUs under controlled-temperature conditions.
The six-month project consequently combined financial optimisation with network resilience, governance and service continuity.
Rather than treating logistics cost reduction as an isolated exercise, Miebach’s approach linked warehouse footprint, logistics providers, tendering and country-specific requirements into a single European network strategy.
The case also underlines the importance of managing integration after acquisitions. As pharmaceutical companies expand across markets, legacy logistics arrangements can create duplication and complexity if they are not reviewed as part of the wider business integration process.
Miebach’s work for the unnamed European pharmaceutical manufacturer shows how a structured network redesign and tendering process can potentially unlock significant savings while preserving the operational reach needed for a complex pharmaceutical supply chain.