The question arises with every project: do we manufacture in Asia or close to home? The reflex is to compare quotes. This is the worst way to decide, because a quote says nothing about what really costs a lot: the quality returns that you cannot audit, the Gerber files sent to the other side of the world, the weeks lost at each round trip when the line is nine time zones away.
qualifying a supplier 9,000 km away
You don’t choose an EMS based on price, you qualify it. The method is the same whether it’s French or Chinese: a large pool of subcontractors, some of whom you meet, a fraction of whom you visit, and only a core of whom you keep to build a real relationship. At each stage, concrete things: factory capabilities and location, turnover and references, expertise and equipment, certifications, quality processes, waste management, and above all, the ability to test the product (ICT, FCT) as much as to assemble it.
The tipping point is the RFQ built on a representative project: complete documentation (BOM, Gerbers, schematics), test sequencing, operating mode, traceability and packaging requirements. The same file for everyone, otherwise the prices and deadlines are not comparable.
local presence changes everything
Auditing a factory from Paris doesn’t work. You need eyes on the ground: visiting the line, seeing the projects in progress, asking the real technical questions (supply chain, standards, eco-design), managing deviations directly. A local relay, for example in Shenzhen, is not a luxury: it transforms a distant supplier into a controllable partner and accelerates the iteration loops that would otherwise take weeks. I have audited both sides, in France and China, and the observation is the same: an EMS is chosen after having seen it produce, not on a file.
intellectual property is a decision variable
Transmitting your manufacturing files is transmitting your product. The question is not only “to whom”, but “what, when, and how”. We protect ourselves with NDAs, but above all by the way we cut the deliverables: not giving everything at once, isolating sensitive bricks, keeping control of differentiating elements, sometimes distributing them across multiple suppliers. For a product where IP is the heart of the value, the risk of copying can be enough to tip the decision towards Europe, regardless of price.
who advises you has an interest in the answer
A point often neglected. An actor who touches a hidden margin on components, or who has exclusive industrial partnerships, will not give you the best supplier: they will give you theirs. A transparent margin on components and the absence of exclusive partnerships are what guarantee that you are being offered the right solution, in the right place, at the right time.
the real comparison, by project stage
The arbitration is not binary and it depends on the moment:
- prototyping and sensitive IP: rather Europe, for proximity, control, and protection.
- volume ramp-up on a mature product: Asia becomes competitive again, provided you have qualified and audited the supplier.
- hybrid: design and prototype close to home, transfer the series where cost and capacity justify it. Or the opposite, depending on the product.
Compare four things, never just one: total cost, deadline, risk, control. The factory gate price is only one line out of four.
“Made in China” versus “Made in France” is not a matter of principle, it’s a sourcing decision. It’s made after qualifying and auditing, weighing IP and control needs, not by piling up quotes. The right answer depends on your product and your stage. The only bad answer is to decide based on the displayed price alone.