Qingdao Tongli Cable Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

Qingdao Tongli Cable Co., Ltd. is a China-based cable supplier located in Shandong Province, with a reported factory area of 32,000+㎡ and 80+ staff. The company lists multiple cable-related products, including construction single-core cable, flexible copper wire cable, BV cable, and RVV copper wire flexible cable, generally with a minimum order quantity of 100 meters. From a supply-chain perspective, the supplier shows a reasonable physical production base and has supplier verification status, which supports basic factory credibility. However, its platform profile shows only 1 year as a Gold Supplier, no Trade Assurance support, and limited commercial performance transparency, with no disclosed six-month order volume, transaction value, store rating, and 0 reviews. The supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking early-stage sourcing discussions, small trial orders, or price/product screening, but it requires careful qualification before larger procurement commitments.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Company: Qingdao Tongli Cable Co., Ltd.
• Location: Shandong Province, China
• Factory area: 32,000+㎡
• Employees: 80+ staff
• Verified supplier: True
• Product scope provided: construction single-core cable, flexible copper wire cable, BV cable, RVV copper wire flexible cable

Elaboration

The supplier reports a relatively sizable factory area of over 32,000㎡, which indicates a meaningful physical production footprint. The employee count of 80+ staff suggests a small-to-medium operational team rather than a very large-scale manufacturer. The presence of supplier verification provides additional credibility regarding the company’s factory or supplier profile, although no specific factory audit certificate, production line count, annual capacity, or international management certification is provided in the data.

Scoring Rationale

The factory area is a positive indicator and supports the view that the company has more than basic workshop-level capacity. However, the employee base is moderate, and there is insufficient data on production capacity, machinery, annual output, factory audit details, or formal factory certifications. Therefore, the supplier fits best into the “medium stable factory” range rather than the “large-scale stable supply chain” tier.

Final Score

16 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier duration: 1 year
• Trade Assurance: False
• Verified supplier: True
• Platform/industry tags:
• Warranty available
• Response time ≤3h
• On-time delivery 100.0%
• Full customization

Elaboration

The supplier has Gold Supplier status, but the duration is only 1 year, which limits long-term platform credibility. Supplier verification is a positive factor and suggests some level of platform-side validation. The listed tags, including warranty availability, full customization, response time ≤3h, and 100% on-time delivery, improve the profile completeness. However, the absence of Trade Assurance reduces buyer protection and weakens transaction security from a procurement risk-control perspective.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has several useful platform credibility indicators, including Gold Supplier status and verification. However, the short Gold Supplier history and lack of Trade Assurance prevent it from being classified as a highly mature and fully protected platform supplier. The platform credibility is acceptable but not strong enough for a high score.

Final Score

12 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

• Past 6-month order volume: Insufficient Data
• Past 6-month transaction value: Insufficient Data
• Store rating: Insufficient Data
• Review count: 0

Elaboration

The supplier’s commercial track record on the platform is not sufficiently disclosed. There is no available data for recent order quantity, transaction amount, or store rating. The review count is listed as 0, meaning there is no visible customer feedback base to validate buyer satisfaction, transaction reliability, or repeat purchasing activity.

Scoring Rationale

Business performance is one of the weakest areas in the provided dataset. Without order volume, transaction value, or rating information, the supplier lacks measurable commercial validation. The 0 review count further reduces confidence in marketplace performance. Although this does not necessarily indicate poor capability, it means procurement teams cannot verify sales momentum or buyer acceptance from the supplied data.

Final Score

6 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Communication response time: ≤3h
• Full customization: Listed in platform tags
• Warranty available: Listed in platform tags

Elaboration

The supplier shows a response time of ≤3 hours, which is commercially acceptable but not at the fastest response level of ≤1 hour. The presence of “Full customization” indicates that the supplier may support customized requirements, although no detailed customization scope, engineering capability, sample lead time, or design support information is provided. Warranty availability is also listed, which is positive for after-sales service positioning.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier demonstrates reasonable service capability through acceptable response speed and stated customization support. However, because the response time is not ≤1 hour and there is insufficient detail on the depth of customization capability, the score should remain in the upper-middle range rather than the highest tier.

Final Score

8 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time delivery rate: 100.0%

Elaboration

The supplier reports a 100.0% on-time delivery rate. Based on the scoring rule, an on-time delivery rate above 90% qualifies for the 9–10 point range. This is a strong delivery indicator. However, the data does not disclose the number of orders behind this percentage, so the statistical depth of the delivery record cannot be fully assessed.

Scoring Rationale

According to the provided scoring standard, 100.0% on-time delivery supports a full or near-full score. Since the rate itself is excellent, the supplier receives the maximum score for this dimension. The only caution is that the order volume supporting this rate is not provided, which should be reviewed during supplier qualification.

Final Score

10 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: Insufficient Data
• Review count: 0
• Finished Product Inspection: Insufficient Data
• Factory/Supplier Verification: True
• Warranty available: Listed in platform tags

Elaboration

The supplier has supplier verification and warranty availability, which are positive quality-related indicators. However, the dataset does not provide store rating, customer review content, customer satisfaction evidence, finished product inspection status, product test reports, or third-party quality certifications. The review count is 0, which means there is no visible customer feedback to support quality consistency claims.

Scoring Rationale

Quality assurance visibility is limited. Supplier verification provides some baseline credibility, but the lack of ratings, reviews, finished product inspection data, and detailed quality control evidence prevents a higher score. From a procurement perspective, this dimension requires further validation through sample testing, document review, and pre-shipment inspection before bulk ordering.

Final Score

8 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Conditional cooperation recommended for trial orders, not immediate large-volume procurement.

Qingdao Tongli Cable Co., Ltd. shows a credible basic manufacturing profile, supported by a 32,000+㎡ factory area, 80+ staff, supplier verification, full customization tag, and 100.0% reported on-time delivery. These factors make the supplier potentially suitable for buyers seeking cable products with low MOQ requirements, initial supplier screening, sample procurement, or small-to-medium trial orders.

However, the main risks are clear: no Trade Assurance, only 1 year of Gold Supplier history, no disclosed six-month order volume or transaction value, no store rating, and 0 reviews. Quality assurance data is also insufficient, especially regarding Finished Product Inspection and customer feedback.

Before scaling cooperation, buyers should request product specifications, test reports, quality control procedures, sample validation, production capacity details, and consider third-party inspection. The supplier has growth potential if it can build platform transaction history, improve customer feedback visibility, and provide stronger quality documentation.