Frequently Asked Questions

No. TARS works behind the scenes as a strategic support partner.

Clients maintain direct ownership of the carrier relationship, communication flow, and negotiation presence. TARS supports the structure of the agreement, helps evaluate proposals, and guides decision-making without inserting itself into the relationship.

This is a core part of the model. Strong carrier relationships matter, and TARS is designed to strengthen negotiation quality without creating unnecessary friction.

No. TARS is not built to replace internal teams.

The work is meant to support internal leadership with structural visibility, pricing insight, and negotiation discipline that may be difficult to maintain internally while also running the day-to-day shipping operation.

For many organizations, TARS works best as an embedded, high-touch partner that strengthens internal decision-making rather than displacing it.

No. Renewal is an important moment, but it is not the only useful time.

TARS can help organizations before renewal, during active proposal evaluation, and after terms are signed. That includes validating whether negotiated outcomes are actually holding in live billing behavior and whether the agreement remains aligned as shipment patterns evolve.

In many cases, the most important work begins before the carrier defines the renewal process and continues after signature through ongoing performance visibility.

No. Cost matters, but the objective is broader than cost cutting alone.

TARS focuses on structural economic clarity — understanding where meaningful movement exists, how pricing elements interact, and which agreement terms deserve priority based on impact rather than optics.

The goal is not simply to chase discounts. It is to help organizations make better agreement decisions that hold up over time and improve long-term parcel cost performance.

No. Audit roots remain important, but TARS is not centered only on recovery.

The audit foundation matters because it provides direct visibility into how carrier billing and agreement economics actually behave in operation. That real-world visibility now informs negotiation guidance, structural modeling, agreement validation, and ongoing monitoring.

Recovery can still be valuable. But shaping the structure that determines long-term economic outcomes is usually more powerful.

The real objective is structural economic control.

TARS helps organizations understand how agreement terms behave across the actual shipment profile, where pricing pressure is concentrated, and which negotiation priorities are likely to change real performance.

That means the work is aimed at better decisions, clearer priorities, more durable outcomes, and stronger agreement performance once terms are live.

TARS is typically a strong fit for organizations that want more than surface-level negotiation support.

That often includes companies with meaningful parcel spend, operational complexity, active FedEx or UPS exposure, or a need for more disciplined visibility into how agreements perform after they are signed.

The best fit is usually an organization that values structure, clarity, and long-term economic control — not just headline concessions.

The initial review is meant to establish context, not force commitment.

TARS uses that discussion to understand the agreement environment, current objectives, timing, visibility gaps, and where structural questions may exist. From there, the next step depends on the situation.

Some organizations need support around renewal strategy. Others need agreement performance visibility, billing analysis, or clearer prioritization before engaging carriers. The path is shaped by what the organization actually needs — not by a one-size-fits-all process.