Which site should the combined operation keep?
- Reading time
- 3 minutes
- Last reviewed
On this page
When two existing sites could house the combined business, the lowest rent is only one part of the choice. Each site also carries established work, people, customer habits and commitments that may be expensive or difficult to change.
Use one description of the future operation for both candidates. The smaller-business brief gives the comparison a consistent starting point. Otherwise, one site can appear attractive simply because its proposal quietly assumes a narrower service.
Compare evidence you already have
Ask each site lead to describe how the proposed combined work would operate there. Use observed limitations, current records and appropriate technical assessments. A site that works well today may not support the added product mix or support activities.
Set out the comparison without arbitrary scores:
| Requirement | Site A evidence | Site B evidence | Decision still needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retained product families | Current capability and gaps | Same basis | Technical assessment |
| Customer access | Actual visit or collection needs | Same basis | Service decision |
| Necessary skills | Confirmed availability and questions | Same basis | Staffing and advice |
| Premises commitments | Current agreements | Current agreements | Property advice |
| Transition effort | Defined work and assumptions | Defined work and assumptions | Cost and programme review |
A missing fact is not a zero score. Identify who can establish it and whether the decision can wait for that answer.
Include the consequences of leaving the other site
A fictional business compares a lower-cost unit with its larger established workshop. The smaller unit appears adequate for production, but the proposal has not accounted for inspection work or customer collections currently handled at the workshop.
The owner asks for those functions to be assessed before comparing final costs. The property adviser also reviews the actual exit arrangements for each candidate. The business cannot assume that keeping one site immediately ends the other's commitments.
Use the premises-exit route guide for the questions to take to that adviser. Use the combined-capacity review to test assumptions about the work the retained site must absorb.
Record why a constraint matters
Some requirements may prevent a site from supporting the proposed operation. Others may be manageable with a defined change. Ask the appropriate specialists to distinguish those positions, including permissions and technical suitability.
Avoid averaging away an essential unresolved requirement inside a broad attractiveness score. Write the actual decision and its conditions. If the owner chooses a site with a known gap, the approved plan needs a credible way to resolve it.
Once the retained operation is defined, identify the equipment each route would release. Discuss the authorised surplus scope with UK Auction Group, keeping alternative scenarios clearly labelled until the business decides. Two possible site choices should not create two conflicting sale instructions.
Sources
This guide is general information and education only. Legal, tax, employment and safety decisions may need a qualified adviser who knows your situation. Read the disclaimer.