[Discussion] the vendor advice in here is 3 years out of date
Posting this as a discussion rather than a claim: the vendor advice in here is 3 years out of date. To save the first four comments: 3 years. The order I actually check things in, for anyone building a process rather than asking about one supplier. First, the record: source page, verification log, and how many…
Where a supplier holds regional stock, ask which lines are actually held there rather than drop-shipped. It changes the lead time and it changes the customs question.
Where a supplier holds regional stock, ask which lines are actually held there rather than drop-shipped.
Agreed — and the corollary is that "no data" and "bad data" have to be written differently. The table separates them for exactly that reason.
Disagree that reviews are worthless. They are worthless when they say "fast shipping A+++". A dated one naming a compound and a document is evidence.
A certificate with a purity figure and no method line is not falsifiable. You cannot reproduce it, you cannot check it, and it tells you nothing about how the number was produced.
ask for the batch record before you ask for a discount
That is a report count, not a test count. The table lists both and they are very different numbers.
Kept a spreadsheet of quoted versus actual lead time across 17 orders. The quoted number held.
The wider-market rows in the directory carry a band and a report count and nothing else, deliberately. Anything more would be manufacturing precision that the evidence does not support.