# FactoryTender — completed synthetic RFQ example

ENTIRELY SYNTHETIC. No real buyer, supplier, available capacity or production outcome.
Illustration prepared 10 October 2026. Matches the example on /services/quote-comparison.
No named technical, quality or regulatory reviewer has validated it for a real product.

## Document control
- Reference: FT-EXAMPLE-01; specification revision A; illustrative issue date 10 October 2026.
- Buyer: Example Brand (fictional); contact and actual destination are not supplied.
- Purpose: compare a sachet-packing process and identify missing evidence before any award.
- Disclosure: non-confidential summary only. Sensitive product and quote files require agreed recipients, confidentiality and private sharing.

## Defined scope
- Product: buyer-supplied dry powder; exact formulation and handling characteristics UNKNOWN.
- Pack: 100 g sachet using the same buyer-supplied printed film specification Rev A.
- Secondary pack: ten sachets per buyer-supplied carton.
- Requested first run: 5,000 sachets; an alternative higher MOQ must be identified, not silently substituted.
- Process: receive/reconcile inputs; approved trial; fill/seal/code; defined checks; carton.
- Buyer supplies: powder, film and cartons. Their costs are UNKNOWN and excluded from supplier subtotals.
- Destination basis: collection at the Australian production site; actual site and onward freight UNKNOWN.
- Currency: AUD. GST and its applicable treatment are not calculated.
- Exclusions: formulation, material purchase, claims/label approval, export clearance, onward freight and insurance.

## Open technical gates
- Product classification and applicable standards: UNKNOWN; buyer must assign specialist.
- Fill tolerance and sampling plan: NOT APPROVED; buyer and supplier to agree before trial.
- Seal test and release criteria: NOT APPROVED.
- Handling, allergens, cleaning, storage and shelf life: UNKNOWN.
- Wastage/overrun, supplied-material reconciliation and shortfall treatment: NOT AGREED.
- Trial approval owner and written sign-off: NOT APPOINTED.
- Actual site, evidence scope, capacity and subcontractors: NOT REVIEWED.

## Invented commercial responses
A: MOQ 5,000; A$0.48 packing/unit; A$420 setup; A$180 defined trial/checks.
- Packing: 5,000 x A$0.48 = A$2,400.
- Known supplier charges: A$2,400 + A$420 + A$180 = A$3,000.
- At order: 50% packing plus all setup/checks = A$1,800.
- Balance before dispatch: A$1,200.
- Illustrative timing: six weeks after input acceptance and trial approval.

B: MOQ 10,000; A$0.36 packing/unit; A$650 setup; A$180 same defined trial/checks.
- Packing: 10,000 x A$0.36 = A$3,600.
- Known supplier charges: A$3,600 + A$650 + A$180 = A$4,430.
- At order: 70% packing plus all setup/checks = A$3,350.
- Balance before dispatch: A$1,080.
- Illustrative timing: eight weeks after input acceptance and trial approval.

## Annotation: how to interpret this example
1. The product/pack scope is held constant; order quantity is not. B commits to 5,000 extra units.
2. A's known supplier charges are A$1,430 lower; order payment is A$1,550 lower. These are different-order comparisons, not equal-volume savings.
3. B has not offered A$0.36 at 5,000 units. Do not extrapolate that price below its MOQ.
4. Input value, freight, insurance and tax remain UNKNOWN. The full first-order cash requirement cannot be stated.
5. None of the timing, capacity, technical or commercial details above is a live commitment.
6. Decision status: ON HOLD. Resolve technical gates and ask for equivalent-volume and complete-scope responses if available.