Researched profile. The figures here are modelled by us from public information, published with the sources they were drawn from. How we research.
Every cent of an $8.87 order, from the printer to what is left — and the largest single line is not the product, it is moving it.
Four printers in China quote this deck publicly, at minimums a first order could actually meet. The spread is wide because “a deck of cards” covers a lot of paper stocks and box finishes, so the figure used below sits mid-range rather than at the floor.
| Quote | Region | MOQ | Lead time | Unit cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangzhou Miyi Printing Co., Ltd | Guangdong, CN | 500 sets | not quoted | $0.50–1.00 / deck |
| Shenzhen Gold Sun Color Printing Co., Ltd | Guangdong, CN | 300 pieces | not quoted | $0.70–3.00 / deck |
| Guangzhou Zhongtian Paper Product Co., Ltd | Guangdong, CN | 500 pieces | not quoted | $0.12–0.99 / deck |
| Tianjin Caile Printing Co., Ltd | Tianjin, CN | 100 pieces | not quoted | $0.01–0.55 / deck |
| Freight and inbound — a placeholder, not a quote | CN → US | — | — | $0.50 / deck |
The freight line is the one figure here that nobody published. It is our placeholder, and the first thing to replace with a real quote — at these prices it moves the margin by more than the printing does.
The shape of it is unusual: on most products the factory is the largest cost and the marketplace takes a slice. Here it is the other way round. Fulfilment alone is more than twice the cost of goods, because Amazon prices moving a box by its size and weight rather than by what is in it — and a deck of cards costs about the same to pick, pack and ship whether it sells for $6.97 or $19.99.
Which is the argument for the $12.99 and $19.99 re-cuts. The same object, the same fulfilment fee, at nearly three times the price — every dollar of that increase lands almost entirely in margin.