Swiss Chems got an FDA warning letter — still using them?

VendorMark said:

Six orders from the same supplier over eight months, every one independently tested, and the consistency is the part worth reporting rather than any…

VendorMark has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Prices dramatically below market are the strongest single signal, and the reason is arithmetic rather than suspicion. Synthesis, testing, and cold-chain shipping have floors. A price well under the floor means something was skipped, and the two things that get skipped are testing and content.

VendorMark said:

Six orders from the same supplier over eight months, every one independently tested, and the consistency is the part worth reporting rather than any…

I disagree that testing history is decisive. It tells you what a supplier did when they were being watched. Continuity of behaviour under stress — a late shipment, a failed test, a complaint — is more predictive than any run of good results.

Short answer first, then the reasoning. The pattern that distinguishes a bad batch from an exit is behaviour rather than product. A bad batch comes with communication, a reshipment offer and a batch number. An exit comes with slower replies, pressure toward less reversible payment methods, sudden discounting, and the same reassurance repeated without any new information. The product tells you less than the correspondence does.

JennaRN said:

Prices dramatically below market are the strongest single signal, and the reason is arithmetic rather than suspicion.

Second this.