You are planning to launch an air fryer, and three suppliers have sent quotations. The lowest unit price looks attractive, especially when the order budget is tight. But one quote covers an alternative coating, another a different quantity, and the third includes delivery to your warehouse.
Before deciding which price fits your launch, you need to know whether the suppliers are pricing the product you intend to sell, in a quantity you can actually buy, with the costs you will actually bear.
Start with the version and quantity you can actually order. If a supplier quotes a different coating, plug or delivery basis, keep it as a separate offer until the difference is resolved.
Before comparing the prices
You have three prices, but do you have three offers for the same order? A 5 L digital air fryer in one colour with a printed retail box is not the same purchase as a stock model with a different coating or an EXW price.
Confirm the product version, purchase quantity, packaging and delivery basis before treating the unit prices as comparable.
Get the quotations onto the same basis
Use one row per supplier and keep the original quotation beside your comparison. Do not fill a missing price, model detail or delivery term from a catalogue page as though the supplier had confirmed it.
| Comparison field | Supplier A | Supplier B | Supplier C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Specification version | |||
| Quantity basis | |||
| MOQ and MOQ basis | |||
| Unit price | |||
| Incoterm and named place | |||
| Packaging included | |||
| Tooling or setup | |||
| Testing and compliance | |||
| Sample cost | |||
| Production lead time and starting event | |||
| Quotation validity | |||
| Payment terms | |||
| Open questions | |||
| Buyer-estimated landed unit cost (only where cost inputs are known) |
Keep separate charges visible. Tooling, artwork, samples and testing may be one-time fees. Packaging and components may also have a minimum that differs from the product MOQ. Ask whether the minimum applies to the order, each colour, each model or printed boxes.
EXW, FOB and DDP prices assign different tasks, costs and risks. Confirm the Incoterms® 2020 rule and named place. Under FOB, delivery and risk transfer on board the vessel at the named shipment port; for containers delivered earlier to a terminal, FCA may better describe the handover. A DDP offer carries import-clearance and duties/taxes responsibilities for the seller, so check whether that seller can fulfil them at the destination. ICC’s Incoterms® guidance distinguishes delivery from the final destination. Any additional logistics or import costs you estimate should remain separate from the supplier’s price.
For your comparison, define the intended product format, capacity, market version, key features, packaging, quantity and delivery basis. The Air Fryer RFQ Checklist has the detailed fields if your original enquiry was incomplete.
Can you compare the offers yet?
- Comparable: the essential product and commercial terms match.
- Partly comparable: some known differences remain, but the rest can be assessed.
- Not yet comparable: a material difference or missing term makes the price misleading.
That status says nothing about whether the supplier is good or bad. It tells you what the figures can currently support.
What answer do you need next?
Identify the specific follow-up beside the affected quote: supplier clarification for missing terms, document review for a model or certification claim, sample check for a physical feature, or order confirmation for a term that depends on the final agreement. One offer may need several of these.
Product and commercial differences
A different product should not be treated as a cheaper version of the same product.
Before comparing unit prices, confirm that each offer aligns on the main product definition:
- exact model;
- product format;
- capacity basis;
- market version;
- key materials;
- control configuration;
- included accessories.
At quotation stage, the immediate task is to determine whether each supplier is pricing the same product requirement.
Where the product differs, record that difference before interpreting the price.
Examples include:
- dual basket instead of divided chamber;
- advertised capacity based on combined zones;
- a different coating system;
- mechanical control instead of digital control;
- a standard accessory omitted;
- an alternative market version.
Only after the difference is visible can the price gap be understood correctly.
Who is making the offer?
The company name shown at the top of a quotation may not perform every role in the proposed transaction.
Record separately:
- legal entity issuing the quotation;
- proposed contracting entity;
- proposed payment recipient;
- manufacturing site;
- sales or export entity, where different.
These roles may belong to the same company, but that relationship should be confirmed rather than inferred from a website name, logo or email domain.
If those names do not line up, build the supplier identity chain before continuing the commercial comparison.
This becomes especially important where the quotation, certificate and proposed manufacturing site refer to different entities.
Multiple entities are not automatically a problem. The issue is whether their roles are understood before the order proceeds.
Unit costs and separate charges
A quoted unit price often excludes costs that appear elsewhere in the project.
Project-level costs may include:
- tooling;
- mould changes;
- samples;
- artwork setup;
- panel development;
- software changes;
- testing;
- certification;
- packaging development.
Unit-level costs may include:
- the product;
- standard accessories;
- custom packaging;
- printing;
- labels;
- spare-parts allowance.
Keep these categories separate.
A one-time fee can be allocated across an estimated volume for internal planning, but the original charge should remain visible. Otherwise, a supplier with a lower unit price and a higher development cost may appear cheaper than it is.
Quantity, MOQ and model version
MOQ is rarely meaningful without its scope.
A stated minimum may apply by:
- model;
- colour;
- plug;
- packaging version;
- control panel;
- accessory;
- production batch.
For example, a supplier may accept 1,000 units in total but require 1,000 units per colour. Another may allow mixed colours but apply a different unit price.
The comparison should therefore record:
- quoted quantity;
- MOQ basis;
- permitted mix;
- price breaks;
- trial-order terms;
- separate minimums for customised items.
Until those conditions are visible, two MOQ figures may not describe the same commercial flexibility.
Delivery responsibilities
Record the Incoterm and named place or port exactly as quoted.
EXW, FOB, CIF and DDP do not represent the same seller obligations or cost scope. Their unit prices should not be placed in one comparison column without adjustment or explanation.
Even the same Incoterm can cover different logistics assumptions when the named place differs.
A quotation labelled only “FOB China,” for example, does not identify the named port required for a precise comparison.
Where the offers use different trade terms, either:
- request revised quotations on one basis; or
- retain the original terms and show the adjustment separately.
Do not hide the difference inside a single landed-cost figure without retaining the source assumptions.
Timing assumptions
A shorter quoted lead time does not automatically mean a faster project.
Compare:
- sample type;
- sample lead-time starting point;
- production lead-time starting point;
- packaging approval assumptions;
- material availability;
- pre-production sample requirements;
- shipment-ready definition.
One supplier may count from deposit, while another counts from final artwork approval. A third may exclude the time required for custom materials.
The schedules become comparable only after their starting events and included stages are aligned.
Documents must match the quoted version
The quotation may say that testing is complete or a report is available. Ask for the actual document and check its model, electrical version, named entities and stated scope against the quoted air fryer.
A report for a related model is not automatically evidence for the version you intend to sell. If the relationship is unclear, note the document supplied and ask the supplier to identify the models or variants it covers. A qualified compliance review may be needed for the destination market.
Record the source and the next question rather than filling the gap with a claim from a website or another model’s catalogue page.
Illustrative Air Fryer comparison
The figures below are a hypothetical example created only to show the normalisation method. They are not market prices, supplier offers or sourcing benchmarks.
| Field | Supplier A | Supplier B | Supplier C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quoted version | 5 L digital, standard coating, V2 RFQ | 5 L digital, alternative basket coating, V1 RFQ | 5 L digital, standard coating, V2 RFQ |
| Quantity basis | 1,000 units, one colour | 1,000 units, two colours | 800 units, one colour |
| Illustrative unit price | USD 31.80 FOB Ningbo port | USD 30.90 EXW (collection point not stated) | USD 35.40 DDP Manchester, UK |
| MOQ basis | 1,000 per colour | 500 per colour; printed box minimum separate | 800 total; one colour |
| Packaging | Custom colour box included | Stock box included; custom box extra | Custom colour box included |
| Testing and setup | Existing report offered for review; model coverage open | Testing excluded; artwork setup USD 180 | Testing responsibility not stated |
| Production lead time | 35 days from deposit and artwork approval | 30 days from deposit; custom-box timing open | 42 days from deposit and final sample approval |
| Payment terms | 30% deposit, balance before shipment | 40% deposit, balance before shipment | 30% deposit, balance before dispatch |
| Comparability | Closest stated product version; document coverage open | Not yet comparable: coating, quantity split, delivery and packaging differ | Not yet directly comparable: quantity and delivery obligations differ |
Supplier B’s lower unit price does not show that it is the lower-cost offer. The quoted product version, EXW scope, packaging exclusion, setup charge and open testing position must first be aligned. Supplier C includes a broader delivery scope but uses another quantity and lead-time basis. The same method applies to products other than air fryers; only the product-specific fields change.
A matches the intended product description more closely, but its report must still be checked for the exact model. B’s alternative basket coating needs a product- and market-specific review, including applicable food-contact obligations. EU food-contact-materials guidance explains the framework, not the compliance status of any quoted air fryer.
These are hypothetical figures. The illustration cannot establish landed cost without separately supported transport, import and other relevant costs.
What to do with the comparison
Do not force different products into a single cheapest-to-most-expensive ranking. Keep alternative models separate, and update a quotation when the supplier confirms a missing term.
For the three example offers above, the next conversation is straightforward: ask B to price the agreed coating and printed box on a comparable delivery basis; ask C to quote the intended quantity and clarify its delivery cost. A’s document scope still needs checking. None of those questions requires demanding an entire factory cost breakdown.
The Supplier Quote Comparison Template provides a general comparison CSV and a separate air-fryer-specific CSV with electrical and model fields. Keep unanswered supplier points in the Supplier Reply and Open-Question Tracker. Once a sample is selected, carry that exact model and version into the sample-to-production checks.
Before committing, make sure the specification, quantity, packaging, delivery responsibilities, lead-time starting point and any material exclusions are clear enough for the order you are actually placing.