Sourcing 5 Product Types at Once (And Not Losing My Mind)

Last week I sourced rulers.
This week I’m sourcing pin badges, mugs, clothing, and small accessories — all for one client.

The questions are the same.
The chaos is not.

Last week’s post broke down the five questions that matter when you’re sourcing anything. This week, I’m stress-testing that same framework across five completely different product categories, all at once, all against the same deadline.

Same questions.
Different answers.
Different timelines.
Different risks.

This isn’t about finding the cheapest manufacturer.
It’s about understanding how MOQ, lead time, and risk behave differently by category — and letting that shape what you recommend, not just what you quote.

The Project Reality

A local school has commissioned me to source merchandise options for their 200-year anniversary. They want multiple product types on the table, knowing full well they can’t order everything.

The constraints are real:

• A fixed budget

• Different timelines by product

• Uncertain demand (some items given to everyone, others pre-order, others staff-only)

My role isn’t just to find suppliers and collect quotes.
It’s to deliver comparative analysis so the school can decide:

• what’s worth ordering now

• what should wait

• and what only makes sense if demand exists

The products under consideration:

• Pin badges (priority — one for every child and staff member)

• Mugs (optional, budget-dependent)

• Clothing (staff only, around 30 units max)

• Small accessories (keychains, stickers, exploratory)

The hard part isn’t sourcing.
It’s helping them understand the trade offs before money is spent.

Same Framework. Very Different Answers.

This is where last week’s five questions start doing real work. In the previous post, I broke down the core questions I ask any manufacturer — around MOQ, lead time, pricing structure, and risk, regardless of product type.

What changes isn’t the questions — it’s how the answers behave once you apply them to different categories.

Pin Badges

MOQ: None — but anything under 50 units carries a premium
Lead time: 3–4 weeks (add a buffer if produced overseas)
Main challenge: Product type decisions

Hard enamel looks premium but costs more.
Soft enamel is cheaper but less durable.
Printed badges are fastest — and feel it.

Each option has a different cost structure and lifespan.

Decision call:
I’m comparing two suppliers directly. If one costs slightly more but delivers noticeably better quality, that’s worth flagging. Timeline matters, but anything under 8–10 weeks still leaves buffer. A 20-week quote gets discounted immediately — no margin for error.

Rule of thumb:
When a product reaches everyone, quality differences matter more than marginal unit cost.

Mugs

MOQ: 10–25 units
Lead time: 4–6 weeks
Main challenge: Setup costs increase pricing fast

Ceramic vs enamel.
Printed vs sublimation.
Plain white vs base colour.

Every choice shifts the economics.

The real trade off looks like this:

• 48 mugs at £8 each

• or 10 mugs at £15 each

Both are valid — only if demand is understood.

Decision call:
If the school pre-sells, larger quantities make sense.
If they order blind, smaller runs reduce risk.

Rule of thumb:
Products with setup costs only make sense once demand is proven — or pre-sold.

Clothing

MOQ: 10–50 units
Lead time: 6–8 weeks
Main challenge: Complexity multiplies fast

Sizing, fabric, print placement — each decision compounds risk.

The key fork:

• DTG (direct-to-garment) avoids setup costs and works well for small runs, but the print is less durable and the per-unit cost doesn’t improve much with volume.

• Screen printing requires setup fees, but produces longer-lasting results and becomes more cost-effective as quantities increase.

Decision call:
If this stays staff-only (around 30 units), DTG makes sense.
If families can order too, screen printing might work — but only with enough confirmed volume.

Rule of thumb:
In apparel, complexity scales faster than quantity — especially once sizing enters the picture.

Small Accessories (Keychains, Stickers, etc.)

MOQ: Often low or none
Lead time: 1–3 weeks
Main challenge: Too many options, too little signal

47 keychain styles.
12 sticker finishes.
Magnets, bookmarks, pens, notebooks…

This is where analysis paralysis lives.

Rule of thumb:
Low-MOQ items are add-ons, not anchors.
They’re only worth pursuing once core products are locked.

The One Decision That Changes Every Recommendation

Before quantities, pricing, or suppliers matter, there’s a more important question:

Do they want to:

• Order everything upfront and hope it sells?

• Run a pre-order with families and staff?

• Set up a small school shop for ongoing orders?

• Focus only on pin badges and skip the rest?

That decision changes everything.

• Pre-selling supports higher quantities and better unit pricing

• Ordering blind shifts priority to lowest financial risk

• A shop model favours low-MOQ, repeatable items

The sourcing research informs the strategy.
But the strategy has to be clear first.

How I’m Keeping This From Becoming Spreadsheet Hell

Comparing 15+ suppliers across five categories needs a system — or it collapses under its own weight.

What’s working:

• Master overview: one row per supplier, grouped by category, with MOQ, lead time, unit price, setup costs, and notes

• Red-flag tracking: vague quotes, slow responses, unrealistic timelines, hidden fees

• Decision matrix: what gets recommended, flagged, or cut

I’m not making the final call.
I’m reducing uncertainty, so decisions aren’t guesswork.

You can’t compare pin badges to mugs directly.
But you can say:

“Pin badges give every child a keepsake at £3 each.”
“Mugs cost £12 each and only work if families pre-order.”

That’s the clarity clients actually need.

AI aside:
I used Claude to scaffold the spreadsheet structure — categories in, comparison logic out. Saved me about 30 minutes. Moving on.

Patterns I’m Seeing (That Don’t Show Up in Quotes)

• Supplier ghosting: If someone is slow during quoting, they’ll be worse when something goes wrong. One follow-up after 48 hours, then I move on.

• Timeline mismatches: When products need to arrive together, the slowest category dictates supplier choice.

• Budget distortion: £500 buys 200 pin badges or 50 mugs. Both “fit.” Only one reaches everyone.

• Hidden costs by category:

  • Clothing → sizing risk

  • Mugs → packaging decisions

  • Pin badges → backing options

These only surface when you source multiple categories at once.

How This Project Is Running

Week 1:
Same five questions to 2–3 suppliers per category (10–15 total)

Week 2:
Compare quotes, chase clarity, flag risk, build decision matrix

Week 3:
Present recommendations
“This fits the budget.”
“This needs pre-orders.”
“This should be dropped.”

Week 4:
Finalise decisions, place orders, confirm timelines

What’s Next

By next week, all quotes will be in, and the budget scenarios built. I’ll share how I narrow 15 good options down to the five that actually make sense.

The framework from last week still holds.
Applying it across five categories at once is where it really gets tested.