You know the moment. You have three to five sites on the table, the broker is pushing timelines, and someone asks for a clean labor comparison before moving forward. You open five tabs, pull wage data, and build another model from scratch. It is repetitive work with real risk. Small differences in commute sheds, occupation depth, or loading assumptions can swing the answer, and those details get lost when you are moving fast. Research ~10 min to run Compare Industrial Labor Costs Across Sites Vic prompt Use Vic to compare labor costs for up to five industrial sites with commute-shed data, weighted wages, and a 10-year HR pro forma. Purpose Replaces four hours of analyst time with a consistent 10-minute process and surfaces the lowest-cost site before lease or purchase commitments are made. Inputs Candidate Sites Required Role Optional Workforce Type Optional Headcount Optional Output Format Optional Include Location Report Optional Brand Skill Or Assets Optional Loading Factor Overrides Optional Data Quality Overrides Optional Outputs A client-branded Excel workbook with a Comparison Summary sheet and one detail sheet per site covering labor pool, wage benchmarks, 10-year HR pro forma, loading factors, and occupation depth, plus a role-framed executive summary and site-comparison table. Time saved Replaces roughly four hours of analyst work with about ten minutes. How it works You give Vic a short list of candidate sites and, if you have them, a few operating assumptions. The core input is simple: locations. You can add role, workforce type, and headcount to shape the model, plus any loading factor overrides or data quality notes if your client has specific views. Run it with: "Use Vic to compare labor costs for up to five industrial sites with commute-shed data, weighted wages, and a 10-year HR pro forma." Vic pulls commute shed labor data for each site and applies weighted wages against benchmarks. Headline wages miss the mix of roles you will hire and the depth of each occupation in the local market. The task then builds a 10 year HR pro forma for every site using those inputs and standard loading factors unless you change them. The output is a client branded Excel workbook you can send as is or drop into your materials. A Comparison Summary sheet ranks sites by total loaded labor cost and flags the lowest cost location. Each site also gets a detail tab with labor pool metrics, wage benchmarks, occupation depth, loading factors, and the full 10 year HR pro forma. There is also a role framed executive summary and a clean site comparison table for quick reads. The value is consistency. Every site is evaluated on the same basis, with the same structure and assumptions, so you are not defending a model you built at midnight. If a client wants to tweak headcount or adjust loading factors, rerun the task and get a new, aligned set of outputs instead of patching a spreadsheet. This also changes timing. You can surface the lowest cost site early, before lease or purchase decisions narrow your options. That is when the answer has the most influence with your team and your client. Ten minutes later you have a ranked view, a 10 year cost picture, and a deliverable that holds up in a meeting. The alternative is still open tabs and a fragile model. Most teams do not need more creativity here. They need the same answer every time, fast.