The cheapest quote is almost never the best order. This is not a moral argument about fair pricing - it is an operating argument about what a unit price is. A unit price buys a specific set of behaviours from a factory, and those behaviours differ sharply between the quote that won on price and the one that came in a few percent above it.
Factories do not lose money on purpose. A quote below the market is not generosity; it is a capacity decision. It means the order will run on whatever line time and whatever fabric allocation is left over after the buyers who pay properly get theirs. That is invisible on the day the order is placed and extremely visible in week five, when your fabric lot changes or your shipment slips behind a better-paying order.
Here is the mechanism nobody prices in: when you award orders purely on unit price, the factories that win your business are, by construction, the ones that quote lowest - which over-represents the ones with weak cost discipline, thin quality systems, or a plan to recover margin elsewhere. You are not just buying this order cheaply. You are filtering your future supplier pool for the wrong trait.
None of this means accepting the first number. Compare quotes on the same terms, decompose the differences, and push back where a line is padded - that is normal, and factories respect it. The discipline is comparing like specifications, then paying for the specification you actually asked for. A quote that sits well below everyone else on identical specs is not a bargain; it is a misquote you will both regret.
Unit price is an input, and landed cost per sellable piece is the output. Every dispute, delay and discount sits between them. Buyers who optimise only the input keep paying for it in the middle. For what the early stages of an order genuinely cost, see why sample prices start high.