About

Managed pallet sourcing. Methodology, published.

Pallet Solutions runs managed pallet sourcing for multi-DC procurement teams. We don't operate facilities -- we coordinate the network of vendors who do. We publish the methodology, the cost index, and the federal sources behind every bid we submit, because publishing the math is what made our managed work audit-defensible in the first place. The intelligence layer became its own asset along the way.

Pallet Solutions started as an operator. Running managed pallet programs for multi-facility retailers, the same gap kept showing up on every RFQ: procurement teams had no benchmark to evaluate pallet pricing. What was on the bid sheet was all they had. On a multi-DC bid, the same large vendor names kept winning every facility -- even when smaller regional vendors were quoting lower in specific corridors. The variation was invisible at the bid sheet level. There was no public reference to audit any quote against.

So we published the math. PSCI -- the only publicly-available, reproducible composite cost-input index in the pallet industry -- aggregates federal data from BLS, EIA, Census, and BEA, weighted to the inputs that move pallet manufacturer cost basis. Every value cites its source. The methodology is public. The Vendor Network maps 7,500+ pallet vendors across North America and Europe, ranked by distance and Enhanced verification tier -- never by whether a vendor is in our managed-programs book.

We don't operate 75 facilities. We don't need to. The vendor network does. Pallet sourcing has historically been an information game -- who has capacity, what the rate is, who's reliable -- traveling vendor-to-buyer through phone calls and emails. We took the information layer and made it public. The work didn't change. The transparency did.

That structural choice creates a potential conflict of interest: we operate the published intelligence AND run a managed-programs book that uses the same network. The wall keeps the two separated mechanically -- not aspirationally.

// Neutrality architecture

How we keep the wall up

Running managed pallet sourcing AND publishing the methodology and vendor network those sourcing decisions rely on creates a potential conflict of interest. Procurement audiences will ask. Here's how the architecture answers.

Vendor Network ranks by distance and verification tier, not by our book. Listed, Claimed, and Enhanced vendors are surfaced based on proximity and verification status. Whether a vendor is in our managed-programs book is not an input to ranking. Shortlists are reproducible by anyone running the same query.
Enhanced verification runs the same three documentary checks plus onboarding call regardless of managed-programs status. Active Certificate of Insurance (COI), 3+ years operating history under the same legal entity, clean dispute record over the last 12 months -- plus a 15-minute onboarding call. No shortcuts for managed-programs vendors. No upgrades for paying for placement.
When we source for a managed engagement, we go to the network on distance and capability fit -- not on whether a vendor is in our managed-programs book. Distance to the DC, pallet spec, capacity, ISPM-15 where applicable, any specifics the engagement calls for -- that's the filter. We keep an open line with the buyer, so when a DC has unusual requirements -- weekend pickup, off-hours coverage, an off-spec pallet, a weather-sensitive corridor -- the buyer flags it and we make sure the shortlist surfaces viable options that actually fit. Quotes from that shortlist are aggregated to a per-pallet price on the buyer's bid sheet. Managed-programs status is not an input.
Buyer-side benchmarks and vendor-side demand signals share the same anonymized transaction data, never the raw data. Buyers see anonymized market benchmarks. Vendors see anonymized regional demand signals. Neither side gets identifying detail on the other. Database isolation is enforced at the role level -- the index-computation role has no grants on managed-programs operational data.
Managed programs and the published intelligence are quoted separately. Buyers can use the methodology, the Vendor Network, or Atlas without engaging us for managed work. Buyers who want us to run the program too quote managed separately, scope-driven. The published intelligence stands on its own; managed sourcing is its own commercial product. Neither commits the buyer to the other.

// Currently active managed engagements

Who we're running programs for

// Active managed engagement

XPO

Multi-facility pallet program with consolidated invoicing, BOL/POD tracking, and core pickup coordination.

// Active managed engagement

Trinity Packaging

Pallet sourcing and program management on an active scope.

What this list is not: a set of testimonials we wrote ourselves. We don't put words in buyers' mouths. If a procurement team wants a reference, we connect them directly. If a managed engagement isn't named here, that's discretion -- not a signal that it doesn't exist.

Managed pallet sourcing. Methodology, published.

How we keep the wall up

Who we're running programs for

Managed sourcing, scoped to your footprint.