Illustrative worked example
How to Put Supplier Quotations on the Same Basis
This worked example shows why two stated unit prices cannot be compared until the product version, quantity, packaging, Incoterm, included work and open questions are aligned.
Example status and scope
Illustrative example. These are not real supplier quotations or a client project. Supplier names, prices and quote fragments below exist only to demonstrate the current comparison fields.
Published: 11 August 2026.
The figures are not market benchmarks and do not describe a current Air Fryer price, MOQ or lead time.
1. Original quote fragments
Supplier B appears to state a lower unit price, but the two fragments describe different commercial and product assumptions.
| Quote | Stated unit price | Quantity | Trade term | Packaging | Product/document basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supplier A | USD 24.00 | 1,000 units | FOB Ningbo | Retail box and standard accessories stated | Destination-market version stated; document scope still open |
| Supplier B | USD 21.50 | 2,000 units | EXW | Bulk packaging stated; accessories not listed | Electrical and document scope not stated |
2. Why the fragments are not directly comparable
- The quantities differ, so the stated prices do not use the same volume basis.
- FOB and EXW do not include the same responsibilities or cost scope.
- Retail packaging and bulk packaging are not the same included work.
- Supplier B has not stated the destination-market version, accessories or document scope.
A lower stated unit price is not evidence that the same product and commercial scope cost less.
3. Normalised comparison fields
Move both quotations into one field structure and keep missing answers visible.
| Comparison field | Supplier A | Supplier B | Current comparison status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quoted legal entity | Company name shown | Company name shown | Contract and payment entities still need confirmation |
| Exact product version | One model and destination-market version stated | Model stated; market version open | Not aligned |
| Quantity basis | 1,000 units | 2,000 units | Not aligned |
| Packaging | Retail box stated | Bulk packaging stated | Not aligned |
| Accessories | Standard accessories stated | Not listed | Open |
| Price basis | USD 24.00; FOB Ningbo | USD 21.50; EXW | Not aligned |
| Compliance/document scope | Required; exact document scope open | Not stated | Open |
| Lead-time start point | After order and artwork approval | Not stated | Open |
| Payment terms | Stated in quote | Stated in quote | Comparable only after the same order basis is confirmed |
4. Open questions
- Can both suppliers quote the same quantity and the same destination-market product version?
- What packaging, accessories, artwork and manuals are included in each price?
- Can both prices be stated using the same Incoterm and named place?
- Which testing, certification or document work is included, excluded or still subject to review?
- What event starts the sample and production lead times?
5. What can be compared now
The buyer can compare which fields each supplier answered, which assumptions each quote disclosed and which questions remain open. The stated unit prices can be recorded, but they should not yet carry the supplier decision.
6. What still cannot be concluded
The example does not show that Supplier A is better, Supplier B is cheaper on an equivalent basis, either supplier is suitable, or either quotation will remain available. The current conclusion is not yet comparable.