MOQ explained:
what hardware startups should expect from screen protector suppliers

Minimum order quantities (MOQs) are one of the first things a hardware startup hits when sourcing a custom screen protector, and one of the first things that creates a problem. A typical Chinese factory will quote 1,000 units as a hard floor. A startup running a 200-unit pilot batch hears that and assumes custom protection isn't realistic at their scale.

It often is, but the conversation needs to be honest about what's driving the number. This article explains why MOQs exist, what's negotiable about them, and what to expect at different stages of a hardware company's life.

Why MOQs exist at all

A custom screen protector isn't a product the factory pulls off a shelf and resizes. It involves:

• Tooling. The cutting die or programmed cutting path specific to your device's dimensions, corners and cutouts.
• Material run. Raw glass or film is processed in sheet sizes that yield a specific number of finished units. Running less than a full sheet wastes material and is uneconomic.
• Setup time. Configuring the machinery for your specific job, then reconfiguring it back for the next job. This is fixed time regardless of how many units you make.
• QC overhead. Each new specification requires its own first-article inspection and sampling protocol.
• Packaging tooling. Custom packaging — your logo, your part number, retail-ready sleeves — adds another fixed-cost layer.

The factory's quote reflects the cost of all of these spread across the order quantity. At 100 units, the per-unit cost is dominated by setup and tooling. At 10,000 units it's dominated by materials and direct labour. The factory's "MOQ" is the quantity below which the per-unit cost becomes commercially nonsensical for them — usually around the 1,000-unit mark for a fully bespoke job.

What's negotiable, what isn't

Negotiable

• The bespoke-ness of the specification. A protector cut to a standard tablet size with your logo on the packaging is cheaper to produce than a fully bespoke device shape with custom optical coatings. Reducing the customisation reduces the effective MOQ.
• Packaging. Plain bulk packaging at first order, with branded packaging introduced at later volumes, lowers the entry cost significantly.
• The supplier's willingness to absorb tooling cost. Some suppliers (including us) will run smaller initial batches at higher per-unit cost in exchange for a commitment to longer-term volume. This makes pilot programmes viable.
• Splitting first-article and production. A small prototype run (5–50 units) for fit-testing, followed by a production run, is often more economical than trying to produce a "small production run" that's neither prototype nor full production.

Not negotiable

• Material processing economics. A glass sheet yields what it yields. You can't get a 50-unit price below a certain floor because the material itself dictates it.
• Tooling cost on novel form factors. If your device has a non-standard shape, the cutting tool or programme has to be created from scratch. That cost is fixed and has to be amortised somewhere.
• QC overhead. Skipping QC to bring the price down is the false economy that destroys the supplier relationship at the first defect batch.

Realistic expectations by company stage

Pre-launch hardware startup (10–100 units needed)

You're sampling, doing engineering validation, perhaps showing prototypes to investors or early customers. Expect to pay a high per-unit rate — sometimes $5–15 per unit for very small batches versus $1–3 per unit at volume. This is the cost of being early. Use this stage to validate the specification, not to optimise unit economics.

Look for suppliers willing to do small custom runs without committing you to ongoing volume. Some suppliers (including us) operate this way; many factories do not.

Pilot programme (100–500 units)

You're putting devices in the hands of real users to validate the product. Per-unit pricing improves. Expect to pay perhaps 2–3x the high-volume rate. This is the stage where supplier relationships either prove out or break — defects at pilot stage are useful data; defects at full production are reputational damage.

First production run (500–2,500 units)

You're shipping product. Per-unit pricing approaches commercial rates. Most factory MOQs are reachable at this stage. Custom branded packaging becomes economically defensible.

Volume production (2,500+ units)

Standard OEM economics apply. The MOQ question disappears. The relevant questions become lead times, buffer stock, replenishment cycles and contract pricing.

The 100-unit floor: what's actually possible

We hold our MOQ floor at 100 units for established device specifications. This is meaningfully below typical factory floors. The reason it's possible: we run mixed production batches, where multiple customers' jobs share the same material run and changeover cycle. Your 100 units travel through the production line alongside other jobs, with QC inspecting yours independently.

This doesn't work for every job. Very high specification customisation, novel form factors with unique tooling, or specialised material grades may still require a higher minimum. But for the majority of OEM applications using standard glass or PET on devices in the typical phone/tablet/POS size range, 100 units is achievable.

The mistake to avoid: optimising MOQ at the cost of supplier quality

Hardware startups sometimes find a supplier offering 100-unit MOQs at suspiciously low prices and assume it's a win. Often what's actually happening is the supplier is sourcing from a factory's overrun stock — units left over from another customer's job, with no traceability, inconsistent QC and no guarantee of future availability.

This is fine for a one-off prototype batch. It's a disaster as a production strategy. The moment you need to reorder, the supplier either can't deliver the same product or quietly substitutes from a different overrun and ships you something that fits differently.

A small-MOQ supplier you can rely on through your growth from 100 units to 10,000 units is worth a higher per-unit rate at the small-batch stage. The continuity of specification is what makes it a real supply relationship rather than a series of disconnected transactions.