If you talk to enough founders, Amazon sellers, or DTC brands, you will hear the same sentence again and again:
“We want a fulfillment center in Europe, ideally in a central location.”
On paper, it sounds logical. One warehouse. One inventory pool. Ship everywhere. Simple.
In reality, this thinking causes delays, higher costs, and unhappy customers.
This article explains why the idea of a single, central fulfillment center Europe setup often fails, and how to make better decisions when choosing fulfillment centers in Europe.
No buzzwords. Just real operational logic.
Most brands choose a central European fulfillment center for three reasons:
These goals make sense early on. Especially if volumes are still low and the team is small.
The problem is that Europe does not work like one market.
This is the core mistake.
Europe looks compact on a map, but operationally it is fragmented.
Different countries mean:
Shipping a parcel from Germany to France is not the same as shipping to Spain, Sweden, or Ireland.
Yet many brands treat Europe like a single domestic market.
That is why “central” often becomes “slow”.
Customers do not care where your warehouse is. They care when the package arrives.
A fulfillment center in central Europe might look efficient, but if it adds one or two days to delivery, it hurts conversion and repeat orders.
In many cases:
This is where a fulfillment network Europe approach starts to outperform a single location.
Longer shipping routes create costs that are not always visible in rate cards.
Some examples:
A “cheap” fulfillment center Europe option can become expensive once you factor in these issues.
This is especially true for fashion, supplements, and consumables.
To be fair, a central fulfillment center in Europe is not always wrong.
It can work if:
But this phase does not last long.
As soon as volume grows, the weaknesses show up.
One argument for centralization is inventory efficiency.
The logic goes like this:
“One warehouse means less stock sitting idle.”
This is partly true. But it ignores demand patterns.
Demand is not evenly distributed across Europe. Some countries sell more, faster, and more consistently.
A single warehouse forces you to average everything. That leads to:
A smarter fulfillment network Europe setup places stock closer to demand, even if it means holding a bit more inventory overall.
Brands often think local fulfillment is only about speed.
It is not.
Local or regional fulfillment centers in Europe also improve:
Customers notice when parcels arrive “like a local brand”.
That perception matters.
Let’s compare two setups.
Most growing brands end up moving from the first to the second, often later than they should.
Another reason central Europe is often chosen is VAT simplicity.
One country. One registration. Done.
But this is short-term thinking.
Once you sell across borders at scale, VAT obligations appear anyway. Delaying this does not avoid complexity, it just postpones it.
Modern European fulfillment center setups are built with VAT, IOSS, and OSS in mind.
Operations should follow demand, not tax fear.
Instead of asking “where is central?”, ask these questions:
These answers usually point to 2 or 3 regions, not one central spot.
You do not need five warehouses on day one.
But you do need a plan.
Many brands start with:
That way, growth does not force rushed decisions.
The idea of a “central” fulfillment center in Europe is attractive because it feels clean and efficient.
But Europe rewards proximity, not symmetry.
The best fulfillment centers in Europe strategies are built around customers, not maps.
If your fulfillment feels harder as you grow, that is a signal. Not a failure.
Rethink centralization. Think in networks. And let operations support growth, not slow it down.
