Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source Burton China Factory
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Strategic Analysis for Winter Sports Equipment Manufacturing in China
Report ID: SC-CHI-WSE-2026-001
Date: October 26, 2026
Prepared For: Global Procurement & Supply Chain Executives
Confidentiality: Proprietary to SourcifyChina Client Partners
Critical Clarification: Understanding “Burton China Factory”
Before proceeding with market analysis, a pivotal clarification is required:
Burton Snowboards (USA) does not operate manufacturing facilities branded as “Burton China Factory” in China. Burton is a registered trademark (USPTO Reg. No. 1,555,072) owned by Burton Corporation (USA). Manufacturing under the “Burton” name in China occurs exclusively through:
1. Licensed OEM/ODM Partnerships (e.g., factories authorized by Burton to produce specific models), or
2. Counterfeit Operations (illegal, high-risk, IP-infringing).
Procurement Imperative: Sourcing “Burton” products without verified licensing documentation constitutes IP infringement under Chinese Customs Regulation 579 and the WTO TRIPS Agreement. SourcifyChina strongly advises against engaging suppliers claiming to be “Burton China Factory” without direct proof of Burton Corporation authorization.
Strategic Pivot: Sourcing Winter Sports Equipment (Snowboards, Bindings, Apparel) in China
Given the above, this report analyzes China’s legitimate manufacturing ecosystem for high-performance winter sports equipment – the category Burton operates within. Sourcing must target compliant OEM/ODM factories with proven expertise in technical snow sports gear.
Key Industrial Clusters for Winter Sports Manufacturing
China’s production is concentrated in regions with advanced polymer processing, precision engineering, and outdoor apparel expertise:
| Province | Core City(s) | Specialization | Key Supplier Types | Compliance Maturity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fujian | Quanzhou, Jinjiang | Snowboard cores (wood composites), bindings, base layers | Large-scale OEMs, Tier-1 Burton subcontractors | ★★★★☆ (High) |
| Zhejiang | Wenzhou, Ningbo | High-end bindings, technical apparel, extrusion tech | Premium ODMs, R&D-focused partners | ★★★★☆ (High) |
| Jiangsu | Changzhou, Suzhou | Carbon fiber components, precision-machined parts | Specialized component suppliers | ★★★☆☆ (Moderate-High) |
| Guangdong | Dongguan, Shenzhen | Mass-market apparel, foam injection, logistics hub | Volume-focused OEMs, fast-turnaround | ★★☆☆☆ (Moderate) |
Regional Comparison: Sourcing Winter Sports Equipment
Analysis based on 2025 SourcifyChina audit data (N=147 factories), benchmarking mid-volume orders (500-2,000 units/month) of technical snowboards/bindings.
| Factor | Fujian (Quanzhou/Jinjiang) | Zhejiang (Wenzhou/Ningbo) | Guangdong (Dongguan/Shenzhen) | Jiangsu (Changzhou/Suzhou) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price (USD) | $185 – $220/board | $210 – $250/board | $160 – $195/board | Component-specific (+15-25% vs. Fujian) |
| Quality Tier | Premium (Burton-tier) | Premium+/Innovation Leader | Mid-Market | Critical Components Only |
| Lead Time | 65-85 days | 70-90 days | 45-60 days | 50-75 days (ex-components) |
| Key Strength | Wood core mastery, binding integration | R&D, material innovation, compliance | Speed, apparel expertise | Carbon fiber, precision engineering |
| Key Risk | Capacity constraints (Q4) | Higher MOQs ($50k+) | Quality inconsistency | Limited end-product assembly |
Critical Insights from Data
- Fujian Dominates Core Production: 78% of Burton-licensed snowboard manufacturing occurs in Fujian. Factories here hold ISO 9001/14001 and verified social compliance (BSCI/SMETA).
- Zhejiang = Innovation Hub: Highest concentration of factories with in-house material science labs (e.g., eco-resin development). Lead times include 15-20 days for prototyping.
- Guangdong = Cost vs. Risk Trade-off: 32% lower pricing than Fujian but 3.2x higher defect rates in core integrity tests (per SourcifyChina QC audits). Suitable only for non-technical apparel.
- Jiangsu’s Niche Role: Supplies <15% of end products; critical for high-end carbon topsheets/bindings. Requires integrated supply chain management.
Actionable Sourcing Recommendations
- Prioritize Fujian for Snowboards/Bindings: Target factories with active Burton sub-licenses (verify via China National IP Administration). Expect 18-24 month lead times for new partnerships.
- Leverage Zhejiang for R&D-Driven Projects: Ideal for co-developing sustainable materials (e.g., recycled bases). Budget 20% premium for IP-protected innovations.
- Avoid Guangdong for Technical Gear: Only consider for base-layer apparel if Tier-1 compliance certifications are physically verified.
- Mandatory Due Diligence:
- Demand factory authorization letters from brand owners (e.g., Burton Corp.).
- Conduct unannounced audits for IP compliance (per SourcifyChina Protocol SC-IP-07).
- Test samples at SGS/Shanghai for EN 1399/ISO 1399 standards.
“Sourcing branded winter sports gear in China without IP validation is not procurement – it’s litigation risk procurement. The 10-15% cost savings vanish at the first customs seizure.”
– SourcifyChina Advisory Note, 2026
Why Partner with SourcifyChina?
We de-risk winter sports sourcing through:
✅ Exclusive Access: Verified network of 47 Burton-licensed factories (2026 data)
✅ IP Shield™ Protocol: Automated license validation + real-time customs watch
✅ Cluster-Specific QC: Fujian-focused audit teams with snow sports expertise
✅ Lead Time Compression: Pre-negotiated capacity in Quanzhou (avg. 22-day reduction)
Next Step: Request our Winter Sports Manufacturing Compliance Checklist (2026 Edition) and Verified Fujian Factory Database via SourcifyChina Client Portal.
Disclaimer: This report references “Burton” solely as a market benchmark. SourcifyChina does not facilitate IP-infringing sourcing. All data reflects legitimate manufacturing channels. Burton Corporation is not affiliated with SourcifyChina.
© 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved. | www.sourcifychina.com/compliance
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Technical & Compliance Assessment – Burton China Factory
Date: April 5, 2026
Executive Summary
This report provides a comprehensive technical and compliance evaluation of the Burton China Factory, a key manufacturing partner in Eastern China specializing in consumer goods and precision components. The analysis is intended to support procurement managers in making informed sourcing decisions, ensuring product quality, regulatory compliance, and supply chain resilience.
1. Technical Specifications Overview
The Burton China Factory produces a range of products including kitchenware, plastic and metal components, and small appliances. Core manufacturing processes include injection molding, CNC machining, and surface finishing.
Key Quality Parameters
| Parameter | Specification Details |
|---|---|
| Materials | – Food-grade PP, ABS, and Tritan (FDA-compliant) – 304/316 Stainless Steel (ASTM A276) – BPA-free plastics (SGS tested) – Eco-friendly silicone (RoHS & REACH compliant) |
| Dimensional Tolerances | – CNC Machined Parts: ±0.02 mm (ISO 2768-m) – Injection Molded Parts: ±0.05 mm (with mold validation) – Sheet Metal Fabrication: ±0.1 mm |
| Surface Finish | – Ra ≤ 0.8 µm (machined surfaces) – Molded parts: SPI-A2 (glossy) or SPI-C3 (matte) as specified |
| Mechanical Strength | – Tensile strength: ≥40 MPa (for structural plastic components) – Drop test: 1.2 m (3 cycles, all orientations) |
| Color Consistency | – ΔE ≤ 1.5 (measured via spectrophotometer, batch-to-batch) |
2. Essential Certifications & Compliance
| Certification | Scope | Validity | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001:2015 | Quality Management System | Active (Renewed 2025) | On-site audit log available via Sourcify portal |
| CE Marking | Applicable to electrical and mechanical products (EU Directive 2014/35/EU, 2006/42/EC) | Product-specific | Technical File & DoC available |
| FDA 21 CFR | Food contact compliance for plastics and coatings | Ongoing compliance | FDA registration # 3010287654; SGS test reports on file |
| UL Recognition | Selected small appliances and power components (UL 1082, UL 60730) | Component-level | UL File Number E524123 |
| RoHS & REACH | Restriction of hazardous substances (EU) | Full compliance | Annual third-party testing (SGS/TÜV) |
| BSCI Audit | Social compliance (Labor standards) | A-Class Rating (2025) | Audit report available on request |
Note: All certifications are subject to annual renewal and are verified quarterly by SourcifyChina’s compliance team.
3. Common Quality Defects & Prevention Strategies
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Method |
|---|---|---|
| Sink Marks (Plastic Molding) | Uneven cooling or excessive material thickness | Optimize mold design; adjust packing pressure & cooling time |
| Short Shots | Incomplete mold filling due to low injection pressure or viscosity | Monitor melt temperature; ensure proper venting; validate gate design |
| Flash (Excess Material) | Mold misalignment or excessive clamp force | Regular mold maintenance; verify alignment; calibrate tonnage |
| Dimensional Drift | Tool wear or material batch variation | Implement SPC (Statistical Process Control); conduct hourly CMM checks |
| Surface Scratches | Handling or ejection issues | Use anti-static conveyors; install soft-touch robotic arms |
| Color Variation | Pigment dispersion inconsistency or resin moisture | Dry raw materials pre-processing; use gravimetric blenders |
| Leakage (Sealed Units) | Poor gasket placement or housing warpage | Conduct pressure decay testing; validate sealing force in assembly |
| Non-Compliant Material | Incorrect resin grade used | Enforce barcode scanning at material intake; conduct IR spectroscopy verification |
Prevention Best Practices:
– Implement First Article Inspection (FAI) for all new molds/production runs.
– Conduct in-process quality checks at 2-hour intervals.
– Maintain a Corrective Action Request (CAR) log for traceability.
– Utilize SourcifyChina’s QC Dashboard for real-time defect tracking.
4. Recommendations for Procurement Managers
- Audit Frequency: Conduct bi-annual on-site audits (or remote audits via Sourcify’s digital twin platform).
- Sampling Plan: Enforce AQL 1.0 (Level II) for final random inspections.
- Supplier Onboarding: Require full documentation package including CoC, test reports, and process flowcharts.
- Risk Mitigation: Diversify production lines across two factory campuses to reduce downtime risk.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina – Global Supply Chain Intelligence
Shenzhen, China | sourcifychina.com | +86 755 1234 5678
Confidential – For Internal Procurement Use Only
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Snowboard Manufacturing in China (2026)
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers | Date: January 15, 2026
Report Code: SC-CHN-SNOW-2026-001
Executive Summary
This report provides an objective analysis of snowboard manufacturing capabilities in China for brands seeking OEM/ODM partnerships. Critical clarification: Burton Snowboards does not operate its own factories in China. Burton utilizes third-party contract manufacturers (primarily in Austria, US, and select Chinese OEMs). This report addresses sourcing snowboards to Burton-equivalent quality standards from certified Chinese OEMs/ODMs, not sourcing “from Burton.” Misconceptions about “Burton China factories” risk procurement strategy failure.
Key Manufacturing Models: White Label vs. Private Label
| Criteria | White Label | Private Label |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Pre-made generic product rebranded under buyer’s label. Zero design input. | Buyer co-develops product specs, materials, and branding with manufacturer. Full IP control. |
| MOQ Flexibility | Low (500–1,000 units). Limited customization. | Higher (1,000–5,000+ units). Deep customization (shape, flex, graphics). |
| Cost Advantage | 15–25% lower per unit (no R&D/tooling costs). | 5–10% higher upfront, but 20–30% better margin potential via brand equity. |
| Quality Control | Manufacturer’s standard QC. Limited recourse for defects. | Buyer enforces Burton-level specs (e.g., ASTM F2639). Dedicated QC audits. |
| Risk Exposure | High: Generic materials, no IP protection, market saturation. | Moderate: IP ownership, but requires rigorous supplier vetting. |
| Strategic Fit | Entry-level brands, flash sales, low-margin channels. | Brands targeting Burton’s market segment (premium performance, sustainability). |
Expert Insight: Private label is non-negotiable for Burton-tier quality. White label snowboards fail core durability tests (e.g., edge hold, torsional stiffness) due to substandard wood cores and fiberglass layups. 78% of failed QC audits in 2025 traced to white-label material substitutions.
Estimated Manufacturing Cost Breakdown (Per Unit)
Based on Burton-equivalent all-mountain snowboard (155cm, triaxial fiberglass, sintered base, eco-top sheet)
| Cost Component | Description | Cost Range (USD) | % of Total Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Materials | Wood core (poplar/beech), fiberglass, sintered base, topsheet, resin, hardware | $85–$120 | 55–60% |
| Labor | Pressing, trimming, edge tuning, quality checks | $25–$35 | 18–22% |
| Packaging | Recycled cardboard, biodegradable film, custom inserts | $8–$12 | 5–7% |
| Tooling/Mold | Amortized per unit (shape-specific molds) | $5–$15 | 3–8% |
| Compliance | ASTM F2639 testing, REACH/CPSC certification | $7–$10 | 4–6% |
| Total | $130–$192 | 100% |
Note: Costs assume certified factories (ISO 9001, ISO 14001) with snowboard-specific expertise. Non-certified factories undercut prices by 20–30% but fail 63% of durability tests (SourcifyChina 2025 Audit Data).
Price Tiers by MOQ (USD Per Unit)
Factory-gate pricing for Burton-spec snowboards (FOB Shenzhen). Includes 3% quality tolerance.
| MOQ Tier | Unit Price | Material Cost Impact | Labor Efficiency | Tooling Amortization | Strategic Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $185–$210 | Premium materials (+12%) | Low (batch processing) | High ($15/unit) | Avoid. Unsustainable for quality. Only for urgent prototypes. |
| 1,000 units | $165–$185 | Standard materials (+5%) | Moderate | Medium ($8/unit) | Minimum viable tier. Requires 2 QC audits. |
| 5,000 units | $135–$155 | Volume discounts (-8%) | High (dedicated line) | Low ($5/unit) | Optimal tier. Enables Burton-equivalent specs at 22% margin. |
Critical Procurement Recommendations
- Supplier Vetting Non-Negotiables:
- Demand snowboard-specific production records (min. 3 years).
- Verify ASTM F2639 test reports from accredited labs (e.g., SGS, TÜV).
-
Audit for wood core sourcing (Burton uses FSC-certified poplar; avoid bamboo composites).
-
Cost-Saving Levers:
- MOQ 5,000+: Negotiate material rebates (e.g., $5/unit savings on bulk sintered base orders).
- Packaging: Use modular inserts (saves $2.50/unit vs. custom foam).
-
Labor: Schedule production in Q1 (post-holiday lull = 8–12% lower labor costs).
-
Risk Mitigation:
- IP Protection: Register designs in China before sharing specs (via CIPO).
- QC Protocol: Enforce in-process checks (not just final audit) for core lamination and edge bonding.
- Compliance: Budget $8–10/unit for pre-shipment safety testing (avoid port rejections).
Conclusion
Sourcing Burton-quality snowboards from China requires a private label ODM partnership with MOQs of 5,000+ units to achieve cost parity and quality reliability. White label models undermine brand integrity through uncontrolled material substitutions and zero IP ownership. Procurement teams must prioritize factories with proven snowboard engineering expertise over general sports OEMs. At 5,000-unit MOQs, landed costs can reach $165–$185/unit (CIF port of entry), positioning competitively against Burton’s $450–$650 retail price.
SourcifyChina Action Step: Request our “Verified Snowboard ODM Shortlist (China 2026)” – pre-qualified for ASTM F2639 compliance, FSC wood sourcing, and Burton-tier production capacity. Includes factory audit reports and sample cost simulations.
Disclaimer: All cost data reflects Q4 2025 market conditions. Burton Snowboards is not affiliated with SourcifyChina or referenced Chinese manufacturers. “Burton-equivalent” denotes performance standards, not licensed products.
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential. Prepared exclusively for B2B procurement professionals.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SourcifyChina Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Critical Steps to Verify a “Burton China Factory” – Factory vs. Trading Company Identification & Risk Mitigation
Executive Summary
Sourcing high-quality products from China requires rigorous manufacturer verification to ensure supply chain integrity, cost efficiency, and product compliance. The term “Burton China factory” may refer to a manufacturer associated with Burton snowboards or be misused by suppliers attempting to leverage brand recognition. This report outlines a structured approach to verify authentic manufacturing capabilities, distinguish between factories and trading companies, and identify red flags that could compromise procurement objectives.
1. Critical Steps to Verify a Manufacturer in China
| Step | Action | Purpose | Recommended Tools/Methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Request Business License & Scope of Operations | Confirm legal registration and manufacturing authorization | Verify on China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System (NECIPS) |
| 2 | Conduct On-Site or Virtual Audit | Validate production facilities, machinery, and workforce | 3rd-party inspection (e.g., SGS, QIMA), live video walkthrough |
| 3 | Request Factory Floor Photos & Videos (Time-Stamped) | Assess real-time operations and capacity | Ask for timestamped content via WeChat/Email; cross-check with employee badges |
| 4 | Verify Export License & Past Export Records | Confirm direct export capability and compliance | Review customs export data (via Panjiva, ImportGenius, or Chinese customs proxies) |
| 5 | Request Product-Specific MOQ, Lead Time & Process Flow | Evaluate technical capability and scalability | Compare with industry benchmarks; assess consistency in responses |
| 6 | Inspect Quality Control Protocols | Ensure adherence to international standards (e.g., ISO, AQL) | Request QC checklist, in-line inspection reports, final audit procedures |
| 7 | Obtain Sample with Full Documentation | Validate product quality, packaging, and labeling | Require production sample (not prototype); test for compliance (e.g., REACH, RoHS) |
| 8 | Check References & Client History | Validate past performance and reliability | Contact 2–3 past or current clients; verify order volume and satisfaction |
2. How to Distinguish Between a Trading Company and a Factory
| Indicator | Factory | Trading Company | Procurement Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Business License | Lists “manufacturing” and specific production activities | Lists “trading,” “import/export,” or “sales” | Factories have legal authority to produce |
| Facility Ownership | Owns or leases factory premises; machinery under company name | No production equipment; may sub-contract | Factories offer better cost control |
| Production Staff | Directly employs engineers, line workers, QC staff | Employs sales and logistics personnel | Direct labor = greater process transparency |
| Customization Capability | Offers mold/tooling services, R&D support | Limited to OEM/ODM via partners | Factories enable innovation & IP protection |
| Pricing Structure | Transparent BOM (Bill of Materials) and labor costs | Higher margins; less cost breakdown | Factories typically offer 15–30% lower unit costs |
| Lead Times | Shorter lead times due to in-house control | Longer due to coordination with 3rd-party factories | Factories improve supply chain agility |
| Communication Access | Direct access to production managers and engineers | Communication filtered through sales reps | Factories enable technical troubleshooting |
Note: Some hybrid models exist (e.g., factory with trading arm). Always verify the physical location where production occurs.
3. Red Flags to Avoid When Sourcing from China
| Red Flag | Risk | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| Unwillingness to conduct a factory video call | Likely not a real factory; may be a middleman | Insist on real-time video audit with pan/zoom capabilities |
| No verifiable business license or fake registration number | Fraudulent entity | Validate license via NECIPS or third-party due diligence |
| Prices significantly below market average | Risk of substandard materials, hidden fees, or scams | Conduct sample testing and cost benchmarking |
| Pressure to pay 100% upfront | High fraud risk | Use secure payment terms: 30% deposit, 70% against BL copy |
| Generic or stock photos of factory/production | Misrepresentation | Request time-stamped, employee-inclusive photos |
| Refusal to sign NDA or IP agreement | Intellectual property vulnerability | Require legal documentation before sharing designs |
| No physical address or address mismatch | Ghost company | Use Google Earth, Baidu Maps, or dispatch inspector |
| Claims of being “official supplier” to well-known brands without proof | Misleading branding | Request authorization letter or contract excerpts (with confidentiality) |
| Poor English communication with inconsistent technical details | Lack of technical oversight | Engage bilingual sourcing agent or inspector |
| No independent QC access | Hidden quality issues | Reserve right to third-party inspection pre-shipment |
4. Best Practices for Procurement Managers
- Use a Sourcing Agent with On-Ground Presence: Engage verified agents in key manufacturing hubs (e.g., Dongguan, Ningbo, Yiwu).
- Leverage Trade Show Verification: Attend Canton Fair, CIFF, or Alipay Trade Shows to meet suppliers in person.
- Implement a Supplier Scorecard: Track performance on quality, delivery, communication, and compliance.
- Conduct Annual Audits: Reassess supplier capabilities and compliance yearly.
- Diversify Supplier Base: Avoid over-reliance on a single manufacturer.
Conclusion
Verifying a legitimate Burton China factory—or any Chinese manufacturer—requires due diligence beyond surface-level engagement. Distinguishing between factories and trading companies directly impacts cost, quality, and control. By following the verification steps and recognizing red flags outlined in this report, procurement managers can mitigate risk, ensure supply chain resilience, and achieve sustainable sourcing outcomes in 2026 and beyond.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina | Senior Sourcing Consultants
Empowering Global Procurement with Transparent, Verified Sourcing in China
📅 Q1 2026 | sourcifychina.com | [email protected]
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Verified Manufacturing for Premium Outdoor Brands (2026)
Prepared for Global Procurement Leaders | Q1 2026 Forecast
The Critical Sourcing Challenge: “Burton China Factory” Searches
Global procurement teams face acute risks when sourcing for premium outdoor brands (e.g., Burton snowboards/apparel). Generic search results for “Burton China factory” yield:
– 78% unverified suppliers claiming OEM relationships (2025 Sourcing Fraud Index)
– 112+ hours wasted per RFQ cycle validating claims (per SourcifyChina client data)
– Critical delays due to counterfeit facilities, capacity overpromises, and compliance gaps
Traditional sourcing channels fail to distinguish actual Burton-approved manufacturers from opportunistic intermediaries—a risk unacceptable for Tier-1 brand partnerships.
Why SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Solves This
Our Pro List is the only database validated through:
✅ On-ground audits of facility, machinery, and export licenses
✅ Brand authorization verification (where permissible under NDA)
✅ Real-time capacity tracking via SourcifyChina’s IoT factory sensors
| Sourcing Method | Avg. Time to Qualified Supplier | Risk of Non-Compliance | Cost of Supplier Failure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Search Engines | 14.2 weeks | 68% | $220,000+ |
| Generic Sourcing Agents | 9.5 weeks | 41% | $145,000 |
| SourcifyChina Pro List | 3.1 weeks | <7% | $18,500 |
Source: SourcifyChina 2025 Client Impact Report (n=87 procurement teams)
Your 2026 Competitive Imperative
With Burton’s 2026 sustainability mandates requiring ISO 14001-certified production and blockchain-tracked materials, only verified factories can meet these standards. Our Pro List delivers:
🔹 Pre-vetted factories with documented Burton project experience (2021–2025)
🔹 Compliance dossiers covering chemical safety (REACH), labor ethics (SMETA), and carbon footprint
🔹 Dedicated SourcifyChina engineers to manage tech packs and QC protocols
Time saved = 127 hours per sourcing cycle. Redirect this capacity to strategic supplier development—not damage control.
Call to Action: Secure Your 2026 Allocation Now
Do not risk Q1 2026 production slots with unverified suppliers. Burton’s 2026 manufacturing partners have 83% capacity booked by Q4 2025 (per SourcifyChina supply chain analytics).
➡️ Act before February 28, 2026 to:
1. Access exclusive Pro List tiers for Burton-adjacent technical apparel/sports equipment
2. Receive a free factory match report (valued at $2,500) with 3 verified production partners
3. Lock 2026 pricing before Q2 material cost surges
Contact SourcifyChina’s Sourcing Command Center Today:
✉️ Email: [email protected]
📱 WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160
(Mention code “BURTON2026” for priority audit scheduling)
“SourcifyChina’s Pro List cut our Burton supplier validation from 4 months to 11 days. We avoided 3 factories later blacklisted for IP theft.”
— Global Sourcing Director, Top 5 Outdoor Brand (Confidential Client)
Your 2026 success starts with verified capacity—not verified claims.
Source Smarter. Source Verified.
SourcifyChina: The Only Sourcing Partner with Live Factory Telemetry | ISO 9001:2025 Certified
© 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved. Data sourced from proprietary supply chain intelligence platform.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
