Our Philosophy
Most sourcing agents make their money in ways clients don't see: factory commissions, inflated supplier invoices, and kickbacks on logistics. The pricing below is all you pay. No hidden fees behind it. We publish our rates because we believe buyers who compare pricing seriously are exactly the kind of clients we want to work with.
Pricing Tiers
tier 1: verify
349 $
✓ AQL sampling using ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 as the default standard
✓ Defect classification: critical, major, and minor — each photographed and logged
✓ Measurements and specification check against your provided tech pack or reference sample
✓ Same-day English report, delivered within 8 hours of inspection completion
✓ Pass / Conditional Pass / Fail recommendation with clear rationale
×
×
× Rush booking under 24 hours, w
× Certification testing or lab analysis
✓ Pre-shipment inspection (PSI) or, Container loading check (CLS)
✓ Defect classification: Critical / Major / Minor
✓ Physical measurement and function testing
✓ Packaging and labeling verification
best value
tier 2: source
699 $
$149 — delivered first
✓ Realistic factory pricing benchmarks for your product (what manufacturers actually quote, not what aggregator sites suggest)
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓ RFQ management: standardized quotation from each shortlisted factory
✓ Quotation comparison in structured format (price, MOQ, lead time, certifications, risk notes)
✓ Negotiation on price and terms with selected factory
✓ Sample coordination: request, delivery tracking, and review against spec
✓ Full documentation handover: audit reports, contact list, negotiated terms
$550
(balance after Stage 1 credit)
Includes:
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
×
×
tier 3: partner
950 $ + 5%*
Everything in Tier 1 and Tier 2, plus:
✓
✓
×
×
×
On the minimum fee:
The $1,400 minimum applies to orders where 5% of order value would fall below that threshold — roughly orders under $8,000. If your order is larger, the 5% applies straightforwardly. There are no hidden multipliers.
On order size guidance:
Partner is designed for orders where the stakes justify the overhead of structured management. If your order is below $10,000, Verify or Source may be the more proportionate choice. If you're not sure, ask — we'll tell you honestly which tier fits.
IN PRACTICE
WHAT 6% ACTUALLY COSTS YOU
The commission model is the default arrangement for China sourcing agents, and on the surface it looks reasonable. Six percent of order value — roughly $600 on a $10,000 order — for a supplier introduction and some email management. That's the declared number. It's rarely the actual number.
Here's how commission-based agents typically earn on a single order:
Supplier rebates, aka 回扣 (huíkòu)
Quote inflation
An agent receives a factory quote of ¥78 per unit. The buyer is told ¥85 per unit. The agent pockets the spread — roughly 9% on top of the declared commission. This is common enough that most experienced China buyers assume it's happening but have no way to verify it.
Freight forwarder kickbacks
"Preferred supplier" steering
The real numbers:
Comparison table:
| Fee source | Typical commission agent | Connoisource |
|---|---|---|
| Declared commission (6–10% of order value) | Yes | No |
| Supplier rebate (2–5%, undisclosed) | Common | Never |
| Quote inflation margin | Common | Never |
| Freight forwarder kickback | Sometimes | Never |
| What you actually pay | 8–18% of order value | Flat fee. In writing. Before we start. |
This isn't an indictment of everyone working in China sourcing. There are honest agents operating on commission. But the commission model creates structural incentives that work against the buyer — and most buyers don't find out until after an order has gone wrong.
Connoisource charges a flat fee that's agreed before any work begins. We don't earn from factories. We don't take referral fees. If a supplier is on our shortlist, it's because they're right for the job.
IN PRACTICE
What this looks like on a real order.
Case Study 1 — Electronics Accessories, European DTC Brand - PSI Check
The situation:
A European direct-to-consumer brand was placing their second order with a Shenzhen factory — 800 units of a Bluetooth audio accessory, FOB value approximately USD 18,400. They had used the factory once before without incident, so they were considering skipping the pre-shipment inspection to save time and cost.
What we did:
Conducted a standard pre-shipment inspection (PSI) against the buyer's product spec and AQL 2.5 criteria. During inspection, identified a recurring internal connection issue affecting approximately 14% of units tested — 112 units would have shipped non-functional.
What it cost:
USD 350 — one inspection day.
What it prevented:
| Scenario without inspection | Estimated cost |
|---|---|
| Return freight from Europe to China | USD 1,800–2,400 |
| Replacement production (partial run) | USD 3,200 |
| Re-inspection + reshipment | USD 700 |
| Lost sales during 6-week delay | USD 2,800–4,500 (estim.) |
| Customer service and returns handling | USD 400–800 |
| Total exposure | USD 8,900–11,900 |
The outcome:
Factory corrected the defective units within 4 days. Shipment released on schedule. The buyer's total additional cost was zero beyond the inspection fee. The inspection report was also used to negotiate a quality warranty clause into the next purchase order.
Cost of inspection: USD 349
Documented exposure prevented: USD 8,900–11,900
Return on inspection spend: 25×–34×
Case Study 2 — Consumer Goods, Full Order Management
The situation:
An Amazon FBA seller based in North America was launching a new product category — a set of kitchen accessories — with a Foshan factory they had identified through sourcing research. Order value: USD 22,000 FOB. It was their first order with this factory and their first time managing a custom-spec product from scratch. They had previously managed orders themselves and had experienced two delayed shipments and one partial rejection in the prior 18 months.
What we did:
Full Order Management engagement from PO confirmation through container loading. This included:
Production milestone tracking across a 38-day production run
Pre-production sample review and one revision cycle (packaging dimension issue identified and corrected before tooling was finalised)
DUPRO check at 60% production completion — identified a surface finish inconsistency on approximately 8% of units, corrected on the line same week
PSI at completion — passed at AQL 2.5, minor defect rate 1.8%
Export documentation review — one error found on the commercial invoice (incorrect HS code) corrected before customs submission
Handover to buyer's freight forwarder with full documentation package
What it cost:
What it Delivered:
| Value delivered | Estimated equivalent cost if managed independently |
|---|---|
| 3 inspections (pre-production, DUPRO, PSI) | USD 1,050 (3 × USD 350) |
| Production milestone tracking (38 days) | USD 800–1,200 (freelance coordinator) |
| Mandarin factory communication | USD 600–900 (translator/coordinator) |
| Export documentation review | USD 200–400 (freight admin) |
| Packaging correction before tooling | USD 1,500–3,000 (tooling revision avoided) |
| HS code error correction | USD 300–800 (customs delay, amendment fees) |
| Total estimated value delivered | USD 4,450 – 6,350 |
The outcome:
The order shipped on schedule. No customs hold. No rejection at Amazon's fulfilment centre. The client's launch window was met.
The surface finish issue caught at DUPRO — 8% of units at that stage of production — would have represented approximately 1,760 non-conforming units at completion if left unaddressed. At a landed cost of roughly $2.10/unit, that is $3,696 in goods that would have either been rejected outright, sold at a discount, or absorbed as a return liability. It was caught on the production line and corrected in the same week, at no additional cost.
Our fees: USD
Estimated equivalent cost, self-managed: USD 4,450 – 6,350
Net saving: USD 2,400 – 4,300
Problems caught before they became costs: 3 (packaging, surface finish, HS code)
Delays caused by any of the above: 0
The client re-engaged for their next order.
