Dalian Gaishi Food Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Supplier Evaluation Report: Dalian Gaishi Food Co., Ltd.

Executive Summary

Dalian Gaishi Food Co., Ltd. is a China-based supplier located in Liaoning, with a reported factory area of over 22,000㎡ and more than 180 staff. Based on the provided data, the company demonstrates a solid mid-sized production foundation, supported by supplier verification, Gold Supplier status for 18 years, Trade Assurance, and platform labels including Finished Product Inspection, ODM service availability, Full Customization, and Minor Customization. Its listed products are rice-related items with a minimum order quantity of 25 tons, indicating suitability for bulk procurement rather than small trial purchases.

Commercial performance is moderate: the supplier recorded 7 orders and CN¥473.2K+ transaction value in the past six months, with a 5.0 store rating but only 1 review, limiting the depth of customer feedback validation. Delivery performance is strong with a 100.0% on-time dispatch rate. Overall, this supplier is suitable for buyers seeking verified, platform-backed bulk rice procurement, while buyers should further verify quality consistency, product specifications, and post-sale performance before scaling orders.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Factory location: Liaoning, China
• Factory area: 22,000+㎡
• Employees: 180+ staff
• Verified supplier: True
• Product scope provided: rice products, MOQ 25 tons

Elaboration

The supplier has a relatively substantial operating footprint with more than 22,000㎡ of factory area and over 180 employees. These figures indicate that the company is not a small workshop-level supplier and should have a basic organizational structure to support regular production and order handling. The presence of verified supplier status further strengthens the credibility of its physical and operational profile.

However, the data does not provide detailed annual production capacity, number of production lines, warehouse capacity, food safety certifications, export volume, or major customer references. Therefore, while the factory size and workforce suggest stable mid-scale capability, there is insufficient evidence to classify the supplier as a large-scale global supply-chain manufacturer.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier fits the “medium stable factory” category. Its factory area and employee count are solid, and verified supplier status adds credibility. However, the absence of detailed production capacity and broader factory certification data prevents a top-tier score. The company appears capable of handling bulk orders, especially given the 25-ton MOQ, but the available evidence does not fully prove large-scale or highly mature supply-chain capacity.

Final Score

17 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier duration: 18 years
• Trade Assurance: True
• Verified supplier: True
• Platform/industry labels:
• Finished product inspection
• ODM service available
• Full customization
• Minor customization

Elaboration

The supplier shows strong platform credibility. An 18-year Gold Supplier record is a significant indicator of long-term platform presence. Trade Assurance provides additional transaction protection for buyers, and verified supplier status supports the reliability of the supplier’s profile. The available platform labels are also relatively complete, covering inspection and customization capabilities.

That said, the provided data does not include specific third-party certificates, food safety standards, audit reports, or compliance documents beyond the platform-level labels. Therefore, while platform credibility is strong, broader regulatory or certification-based compliance cannot be fully assessed from the given information.

Scoring Rationale

This supplier performs very strongly in platform credibility because it combines long Gold Supplier tenure, Trade Assurance, verified supplier status, and multiple capability labels. The long 18-year platform history is particularly valuable for procurement confidence. The only reason it does not receive a perfect score is that no detailed external compliance certificates or audit documentation are provided in the dataset.

Final Score

19 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

• Orders in the past 6 months: 7
• Transaction value in the past 6 months: CN¥473.2K+
• Store rating: 5.0
• Number of reviews: 1

Elaboration

The supplier has generated measurable transaction activity over the past six months, with 7 orders and CN¥473.2K+ in transaction value. This indicates that the supplier is commercially active and has completed recent platform-based transactions. The 5.0 store rating is positive, but the rating is supported by only 1 review, which significantly limits the statistical reliability of customer feedback.

The transaction amount is meaningful but not high enough, based on the provided order count, to demonstrate a very high-volume online business profile. The low number of reviews also weakens the ability to evaluate repeat customer satisfaction or long-term buyer confidence.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier shows moderate business validation. It has actual recent transactions and a positive rating, but the order quantity is relatively limited and the review base is very small. This creates a gap between commercial activity and proven market acceptance. The score reflects a supplier with some confirmed business performance but insufficient evidence of high-volume, highly validated platform demand.

Final Score

12 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Response time: ≤2h
• Customization labels:
• Full customization
• Minor customization
• ODM service available

Elaboration

The supplier demonstrates good service capability through a response time of within 2 hours, which is acceptable for international B2B communication. The presence of Full Customization, Minor Customization, and ODM service labels suggests that the supplier can support different levels of buyer-specific requirements.

However, the response time is not listed as within 1 hour, which would represent the highest service tier under the defined scoring rules. Additionally, no data is provided regarding sales team size, language capability, technical support structure, quotation speed, sample lead time, or after-sales process. These missing details limit the ability to fully assess service maturity.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier deserves a good score because it responds within a reasonable timeframe and supports strong customization capabilities. Full Customization is a positive indicator for buyers with private-label or specification-driven needs. However, since the response time is ≤2h rather than ≤1h, and broader service-process data is not available, the supplier falls slightly below the top service category.

Final Score

8 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time dispatch rate: 100.0%

Elaboration

The supplier’s reported on-time dispatch rate is 100.0%, which is the strongest delivery indicator in the provided dataset. This suggests that recent platform-tracked shipments were dispatched according to agreed timelines.

However, the data does not include total shipment volume, average lead time, logistics method, production cycle, peak-season performance, or historical delivery performance beyond the reported rate. Therefore, while the available delivery metric is excellent, the depth of verification remains limited.

Scoring Rationale

According to the scoring standard, an on-time dispatch rate above 90% qualifies for 9–10 points. Since the supplier has a 100.0% on-time dispatch rate, it merits the maximum score. The score is based strictly on the provided delivery metric, while acknowledging that broader delivery risk still requires further buyer-side confirmation during order negotiation.

Final Score

10 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: 5.0
• Number of reviews: 1
• Finished Product Inspection: Listed
• Verified supplier: True
• On-time dispatch rate: 100.0%
• Other quality certifications: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier has several positive quality-related indicators. The store rating is 5.0, Finished Product Inspection is listed, and verified supplier status provides a baseline level of platform-backed credibility. These factors suggest that the supplier has some quality control visibility and is not operating without any formal quality-related platform recognition.

However, the customer feedback base is very limited, with only 1 review. This means the 5.0 rating cannot be considered statistically strong. Additionally, no detailed food safety certifications, inspection reports, batch testing data, product specification sheets, or third-party quality certificates are provided. For food-related procurement, these missing elements are important and should be reviewed before order confirmation.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has a good rating and some quality assurance indicators, especially Finished Product Inspection and verified supplier status. However, the very low review count limits customer feedback reliability. Because quality assurance exists but is not deeply documented in the provided data, the supplier is positioned in the “good but not fully validated” range rather than the top tier.

Final Score

15 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Recommended for cautious cooperation, especially for bulk procurement with verification steps.

Dalian Gaishi Food Co., Ltd. shows strong platform credibility, a solid factory scale, verified supplier status, Trade Assurance support, and excellent reported delivery performance. The supplier is most suitable for buyers seeking bulk rice products with MOQ around 25 tons and who value platform protection, supplier verification, and customization options.

Suitable customer types include:
- Bulk food importers or distributors
- Buyers requiring platform-backed Trade Assurance transactions
- Customers seeking rice products with customization or ODM-related service options
- Buyers who can conduct specification confirmation before large-scale purchasing

Main risks:
- Only 1 customer review, making feedback reliability limited
- Recent order count is relatively low at 7 orders in six months
- Food safety certifications, detailed inspection documents, and production capacity data are not provided
- Product quality consistency cannot be fully verified from the available data alone

Growth potential:
The supplier has strong platform foundations, long-term Gold Supplier history, and credible delivery data. If it can provide more quality documentation, increase transaction volume, and accumulate more customer reviews, its procurement attractiveness would improve further. For first cooperation, a controlled initial order, clear product specifications, inspection requirements, and Trade Assurance terms are recommended.