Why request a packing relationship before comparing offers?
An equipment offer may identify deliverable units while its logistics schedule counts packages. Keep both measures and their relationship visible. One crate can contain several items, and one equipment item can require several packages.
The US International Trade Administration describes an export packing list as itemising the contents of packages with related packing details. This supports asking for an item-to-package relationship. It does not determine the packing arrangement, documentary obligations or contractual scope for every transaction.
Use this original RFQ response worksheet to clarify the proposed offer. It is not a customs declaration or confirmation that equipment has been shipped.
Sources: US International Trade Administration: Export packing list
Which supplier response fields make the relationship clear?
Ask for a proposed arrangement with its status stated. If packing will be finalised later, require the supplier to identify that uncertainty instead of presenting a preliminary crate count as final.
| Response field | Supplier information | Buyer check |
|---|---|---|
| Quoted item | RFQ line and equipment identifier | Matches the quoted scope |
| Item quantity | Quantity in the RFQ unit | Not replaced by a crate quantity |
| Proposed package | Package identifier and contents | Every item has a stated relationship |
| Loose component | Accessory or separate part and associated item | No unallocated loose scope |
| Shipment | Proposed batch and included packages | Split shipments remain visible |
| Packing status | Preliminary or confirmed; revision | Basis is not overstated |
| Change responsibility | Updated packing list and response owner | Buyer can reconcile the final arrangement |
How can four equipment items be delivered in two crates?
Illustrative example. A fictional RFQ quotes four small control assemblies, identified DEMO-01 to DEMO-04. The supplier proposes crate A containing DEMO-01 and DEMO-02, and crate B containing DEMO-03 and DEMO-04. The response has four equipment items and two packages. Reducing the RFQ quantity to two because there are two crates would misstate the equipment scope.
If crate B is assigned to a later shipment, record that split explicitly. Do not show all four items as part of shipment 1 merely because both crates appear in one proposed packing list. Obtain the actual shipment arrangement and any effect on the agreed delivery scope.
If an accessory is packed separately, give it its own relationship to the quoted item and shipment. Avoid a generic note such as loose accessories included when the buyer cannot determine which items it covers.
What should be reconciled before order placement?
Compare the RFQ item quantities, accepted offer and proposed package crosswalk. Identify missing items, duplicated allocation and unresolved loose components. Keep contractual delivery terms and unloading responsibilities in their own approved offer fields; a package count does not settle them.
Ask for dimensions and weights only as supported supplier information, with preliminary values labelled. Do not invent freight rates or packing capacities to complete the comparison. Clarify the scope of export or other documentation where relevant to the actual transaction.
Retain the accepted packing basis and the route for later updates. The final packing list and receipt checks are later evidence stages. This RFQ register improves scope clarity without representing a proposed arrangement as a completed delivery.
Common questions
What else should the bid team know?
Can one equipment item have multiple packages?
Yes. Record the actual proposed relationship rather than assuming one package per item.
Does a preliminary packing list prove dispatch?
No. Packing proposal, final packing evidence and shipment confirmation are separate stages.
Where should loose accessories appear?
In an explicit relationship to the quoted item, package and shipment.
Primary sources
- Export packing listUS International Trade Administration