Views: 0 Author: Site Editor Publish Time: 2026-08-13 Origin: Site
You send the same tech pack to two clothing manufacturers.
Both factories receive the same design, fabric specification, measurements, colors, and quantity.
Then the quotations come back:
Factory A: $5.20 per piece
Factory B: $6.10 per piece
Which one is right?
This is a common situation in apparel sourcing. A price difference does not automatically mean one factory is overcharging. Even when manufacturers receive the same technical package, they can make different assumptions about production efficiency, material consumption, quality control, overhead, and profit.
Understanding these differences can help brands compare quotations more intelligently.
A tech pack describes what the garment should be.
It can specify:
Fabric composition
GSM
Measurements
Colors
Sewing construction
Trims
Labels
Packaging
Quality requirements
But it does not completely determine how efficiently a factory can make the garment.
Two factories may use different machines, production layouts, workers, cutting systems, quality procedures, and purchasing channels.
So the same garment can have different production costs.
A useful way to think about it is:
Garment price = materials + production + factory costs + quality costs + margin
Each factory may arrive at a different number for every part of that equation.
Fabric is often the largest single cost in a garment.
The report estimates that fabric can represent around 50%–60% of FOB cost for standard garments, with total raw materials commonly making up roughly 60%–70% of FOB cost.
That means a small difference in fabric consumption can have a noticeable effect on the final quotation.
Imagine two factories making the same pair of underwear.
Both use the same fabric at the same fabric price.
Factory A’s cutting process uses the fabric more efficiently.
Factory B leaves more unused space between pattern pieces.
The garment is identical, but Factory B has to purchase more fabric for every piece.
This difference can come from marker efficiency.
Marker making is the process of arranging pattern pieces on the fabric before cutting. Better nesting means more of the fabric becomes part of the finished garment and less becomes waste.
The report gives an example where one factory achieves 88% marker efficiency while another achieves 80%. On a garment requiring 1.50 yards at 88% efficiency, the lower-efficiency layout would require about 1.65 yards. At $4 per yard, that creates an additional $0.60 of fabric cost per garment.
For a large order, a small difference per piece can become a significant amount of money
Fabric is only part of the quotation.
The factory also needs to calculate how much time it takes to make the garment.
A simple T-shirt may require relatively few sewing operations.
A complicated garment may require many more.
Factories use production-time standards such as SMV or SAM to estimate the labor content of a garment. The report describes these as methods for determining the standard time required for production operations.
The important point for a brand is simple:
More production time usually means higher manufacturing cost.
But two factories may estimate the same garment differently.
One factory may have a highly experienced team and equipment suited to the style.
Another may need more operator time or additional handling.
This can produce different labor costs even when the sewing operations appear identical on the tech pack.
This is one of the most important reasons two quotations can be different.
A factory does not spend every paid minute producing finished garments.
Workers need to change styles, prepare machines, balance operations, handle materials, correct problems, and deal with normal production interruptions.
So factories estimate a line efficiency for production.
The report gives an example using the same garment and the same base minute cost.
One factory assumes 85% efficiency.
Another assumes 60%.
With a 20-minute garment and a $0.05 base cost per minute, the first factory calculates about $1.18 in adjusted manufacturing cost, while the second reaches about $1.67. That creates a 41.6% difference in manufacturing cost before materials are even added.
This doesn’t necessarily mean one factory is making a mistake.
The first factory may have stronger production efficiency.
The second may be using a more conservative estimate, especially when dealing with a new style or a production line that expects more setup and balancing time.
Another reason for different quotations is how factories calculate labor costs.
A factory has more employees involved in production than the people sitting behind sewing machines.
There may also be:
Supervisors
Quality-control staff
Mechanics
Cutting-room workers
Production planners
Management
Administrative staff
There are also costs associated with the factory itself, including rent, electricity, equipment depreciation, insurance, and other operating expenses.
The report gives an example of a factory where direct sewing wages represented only part of the total operating cost. When indirect labor and overhead were included, the factory’s break-even cost per productive minute was significantly higher than a direct-labor-only calculation.
This is why two factories can have different labor-related prices even when their workers receive similar wages.
One quotation may include more of the factory’s actual operating costs.
Quality control also costs money.
Suppose one brand accepts a standard commercial quality level.
Another requires much tighter inspection and fewer defects.
The second factory may need:
More inline inspectors
More measurements
More rework
More fabric and garment checks
More time at final inspection
A larger allowance for potential defects
The report uses AQL requirements as an example. A stricter requirement such as AQL 1.5 can require more quality-control resources and additional allowances for rework and scrap compared with more standard requirements.
So if two factories receive different interpretations of the quality requirement, their quotations may differ.
This is one reason a detailed tech pack matters.
A vague instruction such as “premium quality” leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
A clear specification gives the factory a much better basis for costing.
Sometimes the price difference is easy to spot.
One factory quotes using a $4-per-yard fabric.
Another uses a $4.50 fabric.
The reason may be:
Different suppliers
Different fabric grades
Different purchasing volumes
Different certifications
Different finishing requirements
Different minimum order quantities
Different fabric widths
The garment can look similar while the underlying material cost is different.
This is especially important when the tech pack specifies a general material description rather than an exact approved fabric.
For example:
95% cotton / 5% elastane
doesn’t tell the factory everything it needs to know.
Yarn quality, GSM, construction, finishing, width, and supplier can all affect the actual fabric cost.
Factories operate under different business conditions.
One may operate a large modern facility with more equipment and quality-control staff.
Another may operate with a smaller structure and lower overhead.
A compliant factory may also carry costs related to:
Worker wages and benefits
Safety systems
Environmental requirements
Audits and certifications
Quality-control systems
Equipment maintenance
The report notes that fully compliant facilities can have higher operating overheads than factories that undercount these costs or rely on less formal production arrangements.
This can produce a lower quotation on paper.
However, a very low price may also come with risks involving quality, subcontracting, compliance, or delivery.
For a brand, the cheapest factory gate price is therefore worth investigating rather than automatically choosing.
After covering production costs, a manufacturer still needs a commercial margin.
Factories don’t all use the same target margin.
One may be willing to accept a smaller margin to win a new customer or fill available production capacity.
Another may price more conservatively because its production schedule is already busy or because it is targeting a different customer segment.
The report’s example shows different factory margin assumptions contributing to the final quotation.
This means even if two factories had identical manufacturing costs, their final quotations could still differ.
Factory capability matters too.
A manufacturer may be excellent at producing basic T-shirts but less efficient at complicated underwear.
Another factory may specialize in underwear and already have:
Suitable machines
Experienced operators
Established sewing methods
Existing fabric suppliers
Efficient production lines
Familiar quality standards
That factory may be able to produce your garment at a lower cost even if its general labor rate is higher.
This is one reason brands should compare manufacturing capability, not only hourly or per-piece rates.
There is another important point when comparing international suppliers.
The quotation you receive from the factory is only one part of the final cost.
Depending on the sourcing arrangement, the buyer may also have to consider:
Freight
Import duties
Tariffs
Inspection
Customs-related costs
Trade compliance
Product scrap or quality losses
The report gives an example where a factory with a higher FOB quotation qualified for preferential tariff treatment, while the lower-priced factory did not. After import tariffs were included, the difference between the two options became much smaller.
So when comparing factories, it is useful to look beyond:
“Factory A is $0.80 cheaper.”
The better question is:
“How much will this product cost me when it arrives?”
Don’t compare only the final number.
Ask both factories to clarify the major assumptions behind the quotation.
For example:
What fabric is included?
What GSM and composition?
What fabric consumption is assumed?
What wastage allowance is included?
Are trims included?
What sewing construction is included?
How much production time is estimated?
Are special operations included?
Is the factory using its normal production process?
What inspection standard is included?
Are testing costs included?
Is rework included in the calculation?
What quantity is the quotation based on?
Is the price FOB, CMT, or another arrangement?
Are packaging materials included?
What other costs are excluded?
This makes the comparison much more useful.
Imagine two factories quote the same underwear style.
Cost Area | Factory A | Factory B |
Fabric & trims | $3.00 | $3.10 |
Sewing & production | $0.75 | $1.05 |
Quality & overhead | $0.35 | $0.50 |
Factory margin | $0.30 | $0.40 |
FOB quotation | $4.40 | $5.05 |
At first glance, Factory A looks clearly cheaper.
But imagine Factory B has:
Better fabric utilization
More consistent quality
A stricter inspection system
Lower defect rates
Better delivery reliability
Preferential tariff eligibility
The final sourcing decision may look very different after all costs are considered.
The numbers here are only an illustration. The actual cost structure will vary by product, factory, country, and order.
No.
A lower quotation can be perfectly legitimate.
A factory may genuinely have:
Better production efficiency
Lower overhead
Better material purchasing
More suitable equipment
Higher production volume
More efficient cutting
Those are good reasons to offer a competitive price.
But a very low quotation deserves a closer look if you cannot understand how the factory reached it.
The report warns that incomplete costing can create problems later. A factory that underestimates its real production costs may eventually face margin pressure, quality problems, subcontracting, or delivery issues.
A reliable manufacturer should be able to explain the major assumptions behind its price.
When a brand receives three different prices, it is tempting to create a simple ranking:
$4.80 = good
$5.20 = expensive
$6.00 = too expensive
That approach can miss the real story.
A factory quotation is the result of many assumptions.
The factory has estimated:
How much material will we use?
How long will production take?
How efficiently can we make it?
What quality level does the customer expect?
What does it cost to operate our factory?
What margin do we need?
Different answers create different prices.
The report’s central conclusion is that price differences between manufacturers generally reflect differences in operational conditions, cost allocation, efficiency, quality risk, and other sourcing factors rather than arbitrary markup alone.
Two factories can receive the same tech pack and still give you different prices.
The main reasons include:
Different fabric consumption
Different cutting efficiency
Different production times
Different line efficiency assumptions
Different labor and overhead calculations
Different quality requirements
Different material purchasing costs
Different factory margins
Different compliance and operating costs
Different tariffs or trade advantages
For clothing brands, the lesson is simple:
Don’t compare factory quotations by price alone. Compare the assumptions behind the price.
Ask what fabric consumption is included, how production time is calculated, what quality standard is expected, and which costs are included in the quotation.
Once you understand those differences, a $5.00 quote and a $5.80 quote stop looking like two random numbers.
They become two different manufacturing plans.
And that gives you a much better basis for deciding which factory is actually the better partner.
