How a $620M molder got $3.4M back on resin, freight and customer agreements

The problem

Carver Molded Products runs four plants on two ERPs. It buys $84M of resin a year under index-linked agreements capped at 3 percent a quarter, spends $31M on freight across 11 carriers, and sells to 40 OEMs under agreements with take-or-pay minimums.

Checking one month of one resin agreement meant working out which of three documents governed, then pulling the index: about three hours. Multiplied across carriers and customers, nobody had that time. Increases were paid as billed, decreases went unnoticed, and customer commitments were trued up once a year in a spreadsheet.

What Seeft found

Seeft rebuilt the resin formula month by month, matched every freight invoice to its rate confirmation, and checked every customer agreement against what actually shipped.

• Resin was billed above the formula in 11 of 18 months, $1.9M. Freight carried $720K of accessorials, duplicate loads and an outdated fuel index.
• Two take-or-pay shortfalls had never been invoiced ($540K), and tolling changeovers and scrap had never been billed ($310K).
• $710K of customer deductions were contradicted by the certificate of analysis, the appointment record or the signed bill of lading.

What Seeft got back

Seeft sent the resin supplier one credit request with the formula, the index values and the supplier's own invoices, and $1.6M was credited. Carriers settled $640K as routine. Sales sent the shortfall and tolling invoices Seeft prepared, and $690K was paid. Seeft disputed the deductions inside each customer's window, and $470K was reversed.

The formula price is now calculated before each resin invoice arrives, and invoices land within 0.2 percent of it.