A slide deck cannot be wrong. That is the whole problem with slide decks as a way to evaluate billing software. Every vendor's deck shows a clean contract, a clean invoice, and a clean journal entry, because the deck author chose the example.
We ask for the opposite. Bring your actual signed agreement — ideally the one with the deferred setup fee, the volume tier that changes mid-term, or the renewal clause your ops team argues about every quarter. Bring a carrier export with the column headers a vendor actually sent you, not a template. We will run it through Sonic on the call.
This is uncomfortable for us in a way a deck never is. A real contract can expose an edge case we have not built for yet. We would rather have that conversation with you live than have you discover it three months into a paid rollout. If the structured result is wrong, we say so, and we tell you what we would need to fix it — not "we'll follow up."
Time-to-schedule on a straightforward contract is measured in minutes, not because we timed it once in a lab, but because the parsing step is designed to hand you a reviewable draft you approve, not a black box you trust blind. The same goes for a shipment file: upload, map columns once, and watch the rate apply to each row before you commit to anything.
If your evaluation process only has room for a deck, we understand — but we would rather lose that deal than win it on a demo of fluency instead of a demo of your files.