the online shipping marketplace

I understand there will be those that are resistent to this change, I only ask that you give it time to see how it works and I am confident you will see the benefits that the members of our test group saw! As always, please continue to provide us your feedback on this new product.

Thanks,

MM

I opted into this program a month ago and I think it’s a great idea. The billing is done before the shipment. You don’t have to worry about a bill at the end of the month, so it’s so much better that it’s taken out before. I think everybody would prefer it this way. That way it’s paid for, it’s done. Also, you know that the shippers are serious and less likely to retract the match if they already paid their deposit. It’s a lot nicer to schedule your trip when you know you have definite bids and they paid the deposit.

Over all, I think requiring the shipper to make the deposit equivalent to the uShip fee is a positive step.  My personal preference is for uShip to collect their percentage up front and not charge my card.  I agree with the reasons uShip has stated and consider this an improvement. 

There are a couple areas that I believe will present some confusion.  One is for those TSPs that require a deposit before transporting.  Uship should emphasize to the shipper that the TSP may require an additional deposit and is not trying to rip off the shipper by doing that.  I rarely (have never) required a deposit so essentially it will not affect me.  However, if at some future time for unique circumstances should I request a deposit; I would not appreciate losing a bid because the shipper was poorly informed.  Secondly, it may take some adjustment for TSPs to become accustomed to bidding only the amount they require for transport.  Both of these can be resolved by a concentrated effort on uShip's part by educating the shipper and the TSP.  But....I'll bet you there will be some confusion on both the shipper's and the TSP's side and some hot tempers for a while after this is implemented.

On another quick note, the prohibition of allowing a TSP to cite their credentials in the Q & A is unfair and unwarranted.  I strongly feel that as long as a TSP isn't identifying and denigrating another competitor, he/she should be allowed to "sell themselves and their services" as superior to others.  It is a competitive atmosphere and we TSPs should be permitted to represent and communicate our offer so the shipper can make a decision based on "best value" rather than lowest bid only.  It is not sufficient to say "you can do that in the bid details" and in your profile.  It is obvious that some TSPs have circumvented the rules and acquired numerous positive but fraudulent feed backs.  The unsuspecting shipper that utilizes this site on an infrequent basis as most do will never detect this.  Additionally, the information contained in a TSP's profile is often not understood and therefore not a significant consideration in the shipper's TSP selection. 

I try to play by the rules and abide by the user's agreement; however uShip management should do more to educate the shipper with respect to what is legal for their particular shipment.  Otherwise the meager statements now published are an improvement inadequate to inform the shipper of what he/she needs to know to make a knowledge based decision.  At a minimum, a link to the SAFER website should be conspicuously placed and accompanied by explicit instructions detailing how to verify credentials.  Under these unnecessary restrictions on the Q & A section, I would also expect the number of legitimate retractions to continue to increase and the negative feed backs will trend upward. 

How about just loosening up the Q & A rules and more stringent enforcement and penalties for those that abuse the Q & A narrative?

I also advocate a separate directory and unique identifying symbol for those presenting appropriate interstate credential and insurance to quickly allow the shipper to distinguish them from those lacking proper interstate authority.  I would be very willing to pay a reasonable fee to uShip or a third party to verify and identify my company from the others.

Thank you for indulging me....//   Don 

Please keep the posts in the thread ON TOPIC - which in this case is the change to the way payments are made starting on March 1st. There are many other threads that discuss the other topics mentioned - please post comments re: those on those threads. Off topic posts will be moved, edited, or deleted, at our discretion.

A relevant issue have been raised however about deposits to service providers, and how they will be handled in this new process.

Deposits to service providers is a controversial subjects in its own right. There are many threads about it alone, and there are many service providers that do not ask for deposits and who have expressed their opinion that shippers should not ever pay an upfront deposit and who feel that the shipment alone IS equivelent to the deposit. Many service providers who do not use deposits feel that service providers who do use them are potentially unscrupulous.

As I have noted before, we are watching the deposit issue carefully. We have seen honest service providers who do require deposits and do not want to change that habit, perhaps because they were burned by too many cancelations in the past. But we also recognize that most service providers on uShip do not use deposits and the majority have not had any issue with that policy.

At this time, we will still allow service providers who require a deposit to ask for one, independent of the deposit that customers will pay uShip. However, we recognize that this may be an avenue of confusion for some shippers as to why they need to send in two deposits - and this may affect a deposit-requiring service providers ability to have their bids accepted compared to another service provider who does not have such a requirement.  

Thus, while we will allow these "secondary" deposits to be requested, we strongly discourage its use. We encourage each servcie provider to consider why they are asking for deposits. Some may need the cash to cover immediate costs, but many use deposits primarily to have customers "commit" to a shipment so they "have skin in the game". If this is why you use deposits, we would ask you to reconsider its use on the uShip site as our new deposit program will essentially force customers to "commit" to your delivery and have them have "skin in the game" since they will have paid uShip. Our test program and feedback from your fellow service providers has already proven this out - shippers who give uShip a deposit are much, much less likely to change their mind or back out on you. 

Again, at this time, the decision will be up to each service provider but we feel that not requiring a secondary deposit will allow you to match and compete on the site much more effectively, with little to no loss of security in knowing that shippers will follow through since they will have already paid uShip a deposit.

This tool will be a second way to bid and will be OPTIONAL, which means you will still be able to bid inclusive of uShip fees, like you always have, if you wish. But many service providers have asked for a way to better estimate and pass on fees to customers and this new tool will allow those service providers to do just that - to earn exactly how much they want on a matched shipment, without worrying how much will be taken out for uShip fees.

You don't think though that it can viewed as a second strike against the TSP that does require the deposit. If you view my last two retractions they were for reasons that I now require the deposit. I'm a one man show and can't afford to drive across the country for something that isn't there and these were the two bids where I decided to take a chance and not get a deposit. I think if you guys are implementing this new plan on the 1st you should also, as Don stated, inform the customer as well at bid acceptance that secondary deposits will be possible depending on TSP they choose. It seems to be the only fair thing to do if we are forced to now deal with this. I know it seems petty to you but after enduring losses in the past I won't change my deposit policy.

I don't intend my comments to interpreted as negative.........but........this is certain to inject an additional dose of confusion.  If you're going to make the change I suggest you just make it and quit waffling around with it.  Everyone out here doesn't have time to learn all the ever changing intricacies of your system.  Nor is everyone out here a geek that enjoys the constant tinkering with it under the guise of "enhancements".  An excessive number of "options" serves only to complicate the system and invite mistakes.  Give us a good user friendly system and concentrate of fixing the glitches.  Work on the search functions and you'll help us all.

Thank you //  Don