{"id":2432,"date":"2026-08-18T14:55:28","date_gmt":"2026-08-18T06:55:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/sourcing-basics\/moq-negotiation-options-beyond-lower-minimum\/"},"modified":"2026-08-21T15:45:55","modified_gmt":"2026-08-21T07:45:55","slug":"moq-negotiation-options-beyond-lower-minimum","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/sourcing-basics\/moq-negotiation-options-beyond-lower-minimum\/","title":{"rendered":"MOQ Negotiation: Options Beyond Asking for a Lower Minimum"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cCan you lower the MOQ?\u201d is a reasonable question. It is rarely a complete negotiation.<\/p>\n

When a factory says the minimum is 1,000 units, the useful next question is: What makes 1,000 the workable number for this particular product and order?<\/strong> The answer may be raw material, a component supplier\u2019s minimum, line setup, testing, custom printing, retail packaging, a minimum order value, or the fact that each color and size is being treated as a separate run.<\/p>\n

MOQ\u2014minimum order quantity\u2014can mean the fewest units or minimum value a supplier will accept in one transaction. The threshold may reflect setup costs, administration, materials, packaging, shipping, and the supplier\u2019s need for a profitable order. 1<\/a> It is not always one simple number.<\/p>\n

That matters for a first order from China. If you ask only for \u201ca lower MOQ,\u201d the factory has little to work with. If you show which part of the order can change, and which part cannot, you create several possible ways to make a smaller launch workable without pretending the supplier\u2019s cost structure does not exist.<\/p>\n

This guide is about the structure of that conversation. It is not a promise that a supplier will lower its minimum, hold inventory, change payment terms, or accept a loss-making order.<\/p>\n

Start by finding the real MOQ, not the headline MOQ<\/h2>\n

A quoted MOQ can hide several separate constraints. A factory may be able to assemble 300 finished units but require a much larger quantity of a custom fabric, molded part, printed pouch, color, label, or packaging box. Another supplier may be flexible on units but require a minimum order value.<\/p>\n

NetSuite distinguishes simple MOQ limits from complex ones that can include minimum parts or materials, dollar amounts, and finished-product limits. 1<\/a> That distinction is practical for buyers: a request becomes easier to discuss when the binding threshold is visible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Possible MOQ constraint<\/th>\nWhat to ask the supplier<\/th>\nWhat it may change<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Finished-product quantity<\/td>\n\u201cIs the minimum for the total order, each SKU, each color, or each size?\u201d<\/td>\nHow you group variants and quantities<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Minimum order value<\/td>\n\u201cCan the first order meet a value threshold with a different assortment?\u201d<\/td>\nProduct mix, accessories, or standard items<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Raw material or component<\/td>\n\u201cWhich material or component has its own supplier minimum?\u201d<\/td>\nMaterial choice, color, component standardization, or timing<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tooling, mold, or fixture<\/td>\n\u201cIs the quantity minimum tied to a new tool or setup?\u201d<\/td>\nTrial scope, tooling route, or product design discussion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Assembly or line setup<\/td>\n\u201cDoes each version require a separate setup or work instruction?\u201d<\/td>\nNumber of variants, production sequence, or first-order timing<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Testing or verification<\/td>\n\u201cWhich testing steps are fixed per run, and which are per unit?\u201d<\/td>\nTest plan, product configuration, or first-run budget<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Artwork, labels, or printing<\/td>\n\u201cIs the limit caused by printing method, plates, colors, or variable versions?\u201d<\/td>\nPrint method, artwork complexity, packaging, or label plan<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Retail packaging<\/td>\n\u201cCan product and retail packaging be separated for the first order?\u201d<\/td>\nPackaging format, timing, and presentation trade-offs<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Handling\/administration<\/td>\n\u201cWould a minimum spend or a later production slot work better than a unit minimum?\u201d<\/td>\nCommercial structure and delivery schedule<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

SEACOMP\u2019s electronics-manufacturing overview identifies BOM size, assembly effort, testing, and packaging complexity as factors that can affect MOQ. 2<\/a> Your supplier may have different drivers. The point is not to diagnose their factory from a distance. It is to ask a question specific enough for the factory to answer.<\/p>\n

Separate your non-negotiables from your launch preferences<\/h2>\n

A first order is often trying to do too many jobs at once. It must validate demand, show a complete brand range, use premium packaging, offer every color, and hit a target unit price. That combination can create several MOQ problems in one request.<\/p>\n

Before negotiating, divide the request into three groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Group<\/th>\nWhat belongs here<\/th>\nHow to use it in an MOQ conversation<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Non-negotiable<\/td>\nSafety-related requirements, core function, required fit, target-market labels, essential material\/performance needs, and brand elements you will not change<\/td>\nState these clearly. Do not offer them away casually to reach a smaller number.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Flexible launch choices<\/td>\nColor count, size split, accessory bundle, print position, retail-pack format, finish range, optional feature, or initial assortment<\/td>\nAsk which choices create the highest minimum and what simpler first-run version the supplier can support.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Future-stage choices<\/td>\nExpanded variants, premium inserts, extra language versions, special bundles, or later accessories<\/td>\nKeep them in a documented phase-two list rather than forcing every future option into the first run.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

This is not a license to weaken the product spec. It is a way to stop a small launch from carrying unnecessary variation. If removing an option changes the function, safety, required label, or customer promise, it is not a simple MOQ lever. Treat it as a product decision and update the specification through a controlled process.<\/p>\n

For the documents that keep the product definition clear, see Product Specification Sheet Template for China Manufacturing<\/a>. For a conversation before formal quotation, use What to Ask a Supplier Before You Request a Quote<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Use MOQ options that change the supplier\u2019s workload<\/h2>\n

A credible MOQ proposal changes some part of the work, risk, timing, or order mix. It does not assume the supplier should absorb every fixed cost because the buyer is new.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Option to explore<\/th>\nWhat changes<\/th>\nQuestions to ask<\/th>\nTrade-off to record<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Consolidate variants<\/td>\nFewer colors, sizes, SKUs, or artwork versions in the first run<\/td>\n\u201cIf we keep the total quantity but reduce to two colors, what MOQ applies per color?\u201d<\/td>\nLess choice at launch; may simplify production and inspection<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Use standard material\/component options<\/td>\nThe factory uses an established input instead of a unique one<\/td>\n\u201cWhich approved or regularly used options would reduce the component minimum without changing the required function?\u201d<\/td>\nAvailability, appearance, performance, and reference-sample impact<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Separate product MOQ from packaging MOQ<\/td>\nGoods and retail packaging are treated as different constraints<\/td>\n\u201cCan the product be made at one quantity while the packaging uses a lower-MOQ method, standard pack, or later run?\u201d<\/td>\nUnit cost, visual result, packaging capability, lead time<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Change print\/process route<\/td>\nChoose a process with lower setup or fewer custom elements<\/td>\n\u201cWhich process is available for a small first run, and what does it change in appearance, durability, capacity, or cost?\u201d<\/td>\nCapability limits, reference proof, unit cost, production time<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Combine compatible items<\/td>\nMeet a minimum value or shared input threshold across related products<\/td>\n\u201cCan compatible SKUs or standard accessories count toward the same minimum?\u201d<\/td>\nEach SKU\u2019s exact scope; do not assume cross-counting without confirmation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Accept a higher unit price for a smaller run<\/td>\nThe supplier recovers setup work over fewer units<\/td>\n\u201cWhat quantity and unit price would make a smaller first run workable?\u201d<\/td>\nTotal cost, unit economics, and whether the quote scope remains identical<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Use a planned repeat cadence<\/td>\nPresent a realistic purchasing plan instead of a vague future promise<\/td>\n\u201cIf our first order is a pilot, what history or written forecast would you need to consider a different minimum on later orders?\u201d<\/td>\nNo guaranteed later MOQ; document only commitments you can honor<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Take a later production slot<\/td>\nGive the supplier more scheduling flexibility<\/td>\n\u201cWould a longer production window change the minimum or price for this order?\u201d<\/td>\nLaunch timing, approval calendar, and whether the date is firm<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ask about supplier-held or shared materials<\/td>\nExplore whether the input already exists or can be allocated differently<\/td>\n\u201cDo you hold this standard input, or is there a supplier-owned minimum that applies to us?\u201d<\/td>\nOwnership, storage, allocation, expiry\/obsolescence, and written terms<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Source a supplier built for smaller runs<\/td>\nSelect a different production model<\/td>\n\u201cWhat is your normal first-order range for products with this degree of customization?\u201d<\/td>\nUnit cost, process capability, quality evidence, and long-term fit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

These are questions, not universal solutions. For example, EcoEnclose explains that its packaging MOQs vary with printing process, setup time, complexity, waste, and run time; a lower-setup method can carry higher unit pricing or capability limits. 3<\/a> That is a packaging example, not a rule for every product. It shows why \u201clower MOQ\u201d and \u201csame product, same process, same unit price\u201d may not all be available together.<\/p>\n

Consolidate where the customer will not notice a harmful loss<\/h2>\n

Variant consolidation is often the cleanest first-order lever because it removes separate setups and input requirements. The boundary is important: consolidate optional variation, not core requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Instead of this first order<\/th>\nConsider this first-order structure<\/th>\nKeep under control<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Six colorways with a small quantity in each<\/td>\nTwo higher-volume colorways, with other colors reserved for a later release<\/td>\nEnsure the chosen colors are clearly identified in approved artwork and packing records<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Many size\/color combinations<\/td>\nA narrower size run or a single validated variant for the pilot<\/td>\nDo not advertise unavailable variants or substitute unapproved sizes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Separate logo file for each small market<\/td>\nOne approved artwork version where the market and labeling requirements permit it<\/td>\nLanguage, labeling, trademark, and market requirements must remain correct<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Numerous accessory bundles<\/td>\nOne core bundle and separately packed accessories if that suits the product and customer promise<\/td>\nExact pack count, labels, carton marking, and final assembly instructions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Unique components across near-identical versions<\/td>\nA shared component where it meets the written requirement<\/td>\nConfirm fit, function, appearance, and relevant verification need<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Ask the factory to quote the alternatives as separate configurations. Do not use a verbal \u201csame as before, but lower MOQ\u201d instruction. Each option needs its own product version, quantity-by-variant table, packaging assumption, unit price, one-off charges, lead-time trigger, and acceptance references.<\/p>\n

Do not let packaging quietly become the MOQ problem<\/h2>\n

Buyers sometimes negotiate the product quantity while leaving an expensive custom box, pouch, insert, label set, or print method untouched. Then the factory\u2019s answer appears inconsistent because it is solving for the packaging constraint rather than the product assembly.<\/p>\n

Packaging-specific sources show why this happens. EcoEnclose states that custom-print MOQs can be shaped by print setup, waste, and run time, and contrasts lower-setup methods with different unit-cost and capability profiles. 3<\/a><\/p>\n

Use a packaging conversation that is separate from the product conversation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Packaging question<\/th>\nWhy it matters<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Which pack element has the highest minimum: box, pouch, label, insert, carton mark, or printed film?<\/td>\nStops a broad \u201cpackaging MOQ\u201d from hiding the actual constraint<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Is the minimum per artwork, color, language, size, carton, or product family?<\/td>\nIdentifies whether variants are multiplying the requirement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Is there a different process or format for a small run?<\/td>\nLets you compare a real alternative rather than guessing<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Can a standard shipping pack be used while custom retail packaging is deferred or separately produced?<\/td>\nSeparates presentation choices from the basic product build<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Which proofs, samples, and final checks apply to the alternate pack?<\/td>\nKeeps lower-MOQ packaging from becoming a quality-control blind spot<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

A packaging change is still a product change from the customer\u2019s perspective. Update the artwork, packing specification, label data, and inspection points before production. Packaging Dielines and Artwork: What to Send Your Supplier<\/a> explains what a controlled packaging pack should identify.<\/p>\n

Offer a truthful first-order story<\/h2>\n

Suppliers are more likely to give a useful answer when they understand what the order is for. You do not need to oversell a tiny launch as a future empire. Give enough information for the factory to evaluate the request.<\/p>\n

A concise first-order brief can state:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The current product configuration and the requirements that cannot change.<\/li>\n
  2. The planned first-order quantity, split by SKU, color, size, and packaging version.<\/li>\n
  3. The target launch timing and which date is flexible.<\/li>\n
  4. The alternatives you are willing to consider, such as fewer variants, standard inputs, a different packaging route, higher unit price, or a later production slot.<\/li>\n
  5. The evidence you need before production, such as an artwork proof, sample, first-off check, or specified quality record.<\/li>\n
  6. A realistic view of future demand, labeled as a forecast rather than a binding promise unless you are prepared to make it one.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    SEACOMP recommends discussing MOQ and cost-alignment questions early in product design, when adjustments can be easier to make. 2<\/a> Early does not mean informal. Keep the current drawing, specification, artwork, and quote assumptions in the same thread or document set.<\/p>\n

    Ask for alternatives in one clear message<\/h2>\n

    A factory cannot evaluate a menu of invisible compromises. Give the supplier a short set of options and ask them to identify the most workable one.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Subject: First-order MOQ options for [product \/ revision]<\/strong><\/p>\n

    We understand the quoted MOQ of [quantity] for the attached [product revision]. Our first order is planned as a launch run of [quantity], with the following requirements unchanged: [list core requirements].<\/p>\n

    Please confirm which constraint drives the MOQ: finished-unit quantity, [material\/component], setup, testing, artwork\/printing, packaging, minimum order value, or another item.<\/p>\n

    Please quote any workable alternatives separately:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. [quantity] total units with [reduced variant plan];<\/li>\n
    2. [quantity] using [standard material\/component or packaging option], if it still meets the attached requirement;<\/li>\n
    3. [quantity] with [alternative print\/packaging process];<\/li>\n
    4. the smallest quantity you can produce with the current specification, showing unit price, one-off charges, production lead time, and any limitations.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      For each alternative, please confirm the product\/packaging version, MOQ by SKU or variant, source of any changed input, sample or proof requirement, and what would need our written approval before production.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

      The message is respectful because it asks the supplier to explain a real constraint. It is also disciplined because it requires each alternative to be tied to an identifiable configuration.<\/p>\n

      Compare the MOQ options without choosing the lowest number by reflex<\/h2>\n

      A smaller quantity may reduce inventory exposure. It can also create a higher unit price, a changed process, less packaging capability, or a product version that no longer meets the launch need. Compare the whole first-order structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Comparison field<\/th>\nWhat to record for each option<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Configuration<\/td>\nExact drawing\/artwork\/BOM\/packaging revision<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      MOQ structure<\/td>\nTotal, per SKU, per color, per size, per component, and\/or minimum value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Product scope<\/td>\nWhat is unchanged, removed, substituted, or deferred<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Unit price and separate charges<\/td>\nCurrency, quantity break, sample\/tooling\/setup\/packaging charges, and exclusions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Momento<\/td>\nProof\/sample stage, production lead time, and the event that starts the clock<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Evidence plan<\/td>\nRequired proof, sample, first-off, inspection point, test, photo, or record<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Quality impact<\/td>\nNew visual, functional, material, pack, or data check introduced by the alternative<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Supplier assumptions<\/td>\nMaterial availability, scheduling, stock, expiry, storage, or future-order condition<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Buyer decision<\/td>\nAccepted, rejected, or needs clarification\u2014with decision owner and date<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      This is a narrowed version of the discipline in How to Compare Supplier Quotes Without Choosing the Cheapest by Mistake<\/a>. Article 41 is not a general quote-ranking method. Its job is to make an MOQ alternative comparable to the original request before you accept it.<\/p>\n

      Avoid the promises and shortcuts that create later trouble<\/h2>\n

      MOQ conversations go wrong when the buyer wins a smaller number by making a promise that never enters a document, or by accepting a change no one has clearly described.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Risky move<\/th>\nBetter move<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      \u201cWe will definitely order ten times more next month.\u201d<\/td>\nShare a clearly labeled forecast or plan. Make only commitments your business can fulfill.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      \u201cUse anything close enough for the first run.\u201d<\/td>\nName the acceptable approved alternatives and require confirmation of the actual input used.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      \u201cPackaging does not matter; just make it cheaper.\u201d<\/td>\nDefine the allowable pack change and the product, labeling, and customer-experience checks it needs.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      \u201cWe can sort out the price later.\u201d<\/td>\nAsk for a full price\/charge\/quantity breakdown for each alternative before you choose.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      \u201cPlease ship the small run now; we will pay for the rest later.\u201d<\/td>\nDiscuss any inventory, storage, delivery, or payment arrangement separately and in writing; do not assume it exists.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      \u201cThe sample was fine, so use the new process.\u201d<\/td>\nIdentify the revised process and obtain the evidence your team requires for that changed configuration.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      If the supplier cannot explain the MOQ driver, the changes required, or the commercial scope of the alternative, the negotiation is not finished. A vague promise of \u201cno problem\u201d is not a usable first-order plan.<\/p>\n

      Confirm the agreed MOQ before production starts<\/h2>\n

      Once you settle on an option, write it into the final order records. The agreement needs more than a revised unit count.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Confirmation item<\/th>\nRecord it as<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Product and packaging configuration<\/td>\nCurrent revision numbers, approved proof\/sample IDs, and links or attachments<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      MOQ definition<\/td>\nTotal quantity plus any limits by SKU, color, size, material, component, packaging, or minimum value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Allowed substitution\/change<\/td>\nExact condition, approval owner, and evidence required before use<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Commercial scope<\/td>\nUnit price, currency, separate one-off charges, inclusions\/exclusions, and quote validity<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Momento<\/td>\nSample\/proof timing, production lead time, and what event starts each period<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Quality controls<\/td>\nCustom checks, early-production evidence, final inspection scope, and record format<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Future-order language<\/td>\nForecast, nonbinding discussion, or a separately documented commercial commitment\u2014never an ambiguous promise<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Open points<\/td>\nOwner, deadline, and the fact that production cannot treat an open point as approved<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      A good MOQ negotiation does not merely reduce a quantity. It produces a first-order structure that the supplier can build and the buyer can inspect, price, and explain later. Sometimes that structure will still point to the original MOQ. If so, you have learned which constraint is real and can decide whether to simplify the launch, accept the economics, or find a supplier designed for smaller runs.<\/p>\n

      Referencias<\/h2>\n
        \n
      1. NetSuite, Minimum Order Quantity (MOQ): What It Means, Calculation & Impact<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n
      2. SEACOMP, How is the MOQ on a Product Determined?<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n
      3. EcoEnclose, Minimum Order Quantities: What They Are and Why We Have Them<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        \u201cCan you lower the MOQ?\u201d is a reasonable question. It is rarely a complete negotiation. When a factory says the […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rank_math_internal_links_processed":["1"],"rank_math_title":["MOQ Negotiation: Options Beyond a Lower Minimum"],"rank_math_description":["Negotiate a workable MOQ by identifying the real constraint, simplifying variants, changing packaging or process, and documenting trade-offs."],"rank_math_focus_keyword":["negotiate MOQ China"],"rank_math_rich_snippet":["article"],"_rank_math_rich_snippet":["article"],"rank_math_schema_Article":["a:2:{s:5:\"@type\";s:7:\"Article\";s:8:\"headline\";s:58:\"MOQ Negotiation: Options Beyond Asking for a Lower Minimum\";}"],"_rank_math_schema_Article":["a:2:{s:5:\"@type\";s:7:\"Article\";s:8:\"headline\";s:58:\"MOQ Negotiation: Options Beyond Asking for a Lower Minimum\";}"],"_uag_page_assets":["a:9:{s:3:\"css\";s:263:\".uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-desktop) !important}@media (max-width: 976px){.uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-tablet) !important}}@media (max-width: 767px){.uag-blocks-common-selector{z-index:var(--z-index-mobile) !important}}\n\";s:2:\"js\";s:0:\"\";s:18:\"current_block_list\";a:15:{i:0;s:11:\"core\/search\";i:1;s:10:\"core\/group\";i:2;s:12:\"core\/heading\";i:3;s:17:\"core\/latest-posts\";i:4;s:20:\"core\/latest-comments\";i:5;s:13:\"core\/archives\";i:6;s:15:\"core\/categories\";i:8;s:25:\"greenshift-blocks\/heading\";i:9;s:22:\"greenshift-blocks\/text\";i:10;s:14:\"core\/paragraph\";i:12;s:18:\"core\/legacy-widget\";i:13;s:17:\"core\/social-links\";i:15;s:16:\"core\/social-link\";i:16;s:21:\"trp\/language-switcher\";i:17;s:9:\"core\/html\";}s:8:\"uag_flag\";b:0;s:11:\"uag_version\";s:10:\"1787317261\";s:6:\"gfonts\";a:0:{}s:10:\"gfonts_url\";s:0:\"\";s:12:\"gfonts_files\";a:0:{}s:14:\"uag_faq_layout\";b:0;}"],"_uag_css_file_name":["uag-css-2432.css"]},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sourcing-basics"],"uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":false,"thumbnail":false,"medium":false,"medium_large":false,"large":false,"1536x1536":false,"2048x2048":false,"trp-custom-language-flag":false},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"admin","author_link":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/author\/admin\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"\u201cCan you lower the MOQ?\u201d is a reasonable question. It is rarely a complete negotiation. When a factory says the […]","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2432"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2432\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2651,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2432\/revisions\/2651"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sourcingall.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2432"}],"curies":[{"name":"gracias","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}