Buyer Template
Bottling Line Quotation Comparison Template
Use a scope-first comparison matrix for equipment, formats, utilities, services, commercial terms, evidence, and unresolved supplier assumptions.
A bottling line quotation comparison should expose scope differences before it ranks prices. Supplier totals are not comparable when one offer includes water treatment, bottle blowing, installation, test materials, and spare parts while another covers only the filling block. The template below can be copied into a spreadsheet or project document and adapted to the approved RFQ.
1. Create a controlled comparison header
| Field | Buyer record | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Project and RFQ revision | Project code, RFQ number, revision, issue date | Prevents old and new requirements from being mixed. |
| Supplier and quotation | Legal entity, quote number, date, validity | Connects each comparison cell to a source document. |
| Currency and delivery term | Currency, named Incoterm location, date basis | Separates equipment value from delivery responsibility. |
| Clarification status | Open, answered, accepted, rejected | Makes unresolved assumptions visible. |
2. Compare the complete equipment boundary
Use one row per system or major machine. Add columns for required, Supplier A, Supplier B, Supplier C, evidence reference, and open issue. Mark each offer as included, optional, excluded, buyer-supplied, or unclear. Do not leave blank cells.
| Scope group | Rows to include | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Product or water process | Raw-water storage, treatment stages, finished-water tank, transfer | Flow diagram, capacity basis, instruments, cleaning boundary |
| Container supply | Preform handling, blow molding, compressors, bottle receiving or unscrambling | Bottle drawings, molds, air schedule, format list |
| Filling block | Rinsing, filling, capping, cap feed, reject handling | Product-contact materials, output basis, valve count, format parts |
| Downstream | Coding, inspection, labeling, conveyors, accumulation, packing, pallet handling | Label and pack drawings, line balance, rejection logic |
| Project services | Layout, utilities, FAT, packing, freight, installation, training, commissioning | Responsibility matrix, days, people, deliverables, exclusions |
3. Normalize the technical basis
Create separate rows for product, bottle, cap, label, pack format, target output, shifts, changeovers, utilities, electrical standard, control components, documentation language, and acceptance conditions. Record the supplier statement exactly, then add a normalized buyer interpretation. A higher quoted speed is not automatically a better offer if the reference bottle, line discharge point, packing operation, or acceptable downtime differs.
- Identify every format included in the base price and every optional change-part set.
- Compare named materials and components instead of broad phrases such as stainless steel or international brand.
- Separate rated machine speed, expected integrated output, and guaranteed acceptance basis.
- Record software backups, electrical drawings, manuals, spare-parts lists, and training deliverables.
- Link each deviation to a supplier clarification email or revised quotation.
4. Level the commercial terms
Compare payment milestones, quotation validity, production lead-time basis, packing, freight boundary, insurance, warranty trigger, warranty exclusions, service rates, travel costs, parts pricing, and delay or change-control terms. A low equipment total can shift major costs to the buyer through exclusions, local work, service days, or missing utilities.
5. Finish with a decision record
| Decision field | What to write |
|---|---|
| Compliant scope | Which supplier meets the approved requirement without unresolved substitutions? |
| Material gaps | Which missing items could stop installation, testing, or production? |
| Evidence strength | Which statements are supported by drawings, lists, videos, tests, or visits? |
| Commercial exposure | Which assumptions could change total project cost or timing? |
| Next action | Clarification, revised quote, sample, visit, FAT plan, or no-go decision. |
Keep the source quotation unchanged. The comparison matrix is a decision aid, not a replacement for the supplier’s signed commercial offer or the buyer’s contract review.
Questions buyers ask
How many suppliers should be compared?
There is no universal number. Compare enough credible offers to understand scope and market options, but do not add weak suppliers merely to create a larger table.
Should the lowest total price rank first?
No. First normalize scope, specifications, delivery responsibilities, acceptance, and open risks. Price ranking only becomes useful after unlike items are made visible.
Can this template compare single machines?
Yes. Reduce the equipment rows, but keep the same discipline for formats, utilities, interfaces, documents, tests, services, and exclusions.