Compare the operating models
A fictional camera shop sells model C and rents two cameras of that model. A sale quantity and a rental booking answer different questions: how many can be sold now, and which unit is free over a requested period.
| Business requirement | Sale SKU | Rental unit |
|---|---|---|
| Customer promise | Ownership transferred under supplied sale | Use for named period then return |
| Record | C-S quantity and sale line | C-R1/C-R2 dates and condition |
| Availability after transaction | No automatic return to sale stock | Returned unit needs readiness check |
Work through the chosen model
Link C-S, C-R1 and C-R2 to model C for browsing. Keep sale inventory separate from the asset calendar. A rental record names unit, borrower, start, end and handover condition. Selling a former rental requires an explicit catalogue/asset change under the shop’s policy.
- Customer chooses buy or rent
- Allocate sale quantity or dated asset
- Complete sale or rental handover
- Check returned rental unit before reuse
A linked catalogue aids browsing but separate stock and asset records add administration. Combining them would make the customer’s promise and future availability ambiguous.
Selling one C-S reduces sale stock from four to three. Renting C-R1 for Monday does not reduce C-S; returning C-R1 on Tuesday does not increase C-S. C-R2 remains the other rental asset.
When the other model fits
Customers keep every camera after payment and no unit returns. Is rental scheduling useful?
Show the worked answer
No. This is a sale catalogue even if customers pay in instalments; payment timing alone does not create a reusable rental asset.