Share your ideas with us

As online shopping continues to expand, cities and businesses are looking for ways to simplify last-mile delivery. In this shift, automated parcel lockers have become a practical solution, helping reduce missed deliveries and improving convenience for both couriers and customers. Their use is steadily shaping the future of contactless and efficient package management.

As a merchant, I allow shoppers to exchange items for different variants during returns, which may have different prices. For example, a Small size costs $30 while a Large size costs $50.   Currently, Shopify allows me to adjust prices manually only after the Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) is submitted. If aftership could facilitate charging or refunding price differences for variants during the return request process, it would greatly streamline our operations and enhancing the overall efficiency of RMA management.

I have built a website to publish articles about local business services. Can you tell me how I can rank my website? Is there any SEO expert who can help? The website is built on a custom Laravel framework.

As a loyal Aftership customer, I am extremely disappointed to learn that integrating a new carrier requires an additional fee—a neither transparent nor customer-friendly policy. Carrier expansion should be a standard improvement to Aftership’s platform, not an extra cost passed onto paying customers. Why This Needs to Change: Improving Aftership Should Be Your Priority, Not an Upsell Adding new carriers benefits all Aftership users. Expanding carrier integrations should be part of Aftership’s ongoing development efforts, not a hidden fee imposed on individual customers. Hidden Costs Undermine Customer Trust Nowhere in Aftership’s pricing model is it clearly stated that carrier integration comes with additional fees. This lack of transparency frustrates users and creates an unexpected financial burden. Loyal Customers Deserve Better Customers who have trusted Aftership for their business operations should not have to pay extra to access a fundamental feature like carrier support. Proposed Solution: Aftership should eliminate extra fees for new carrier integrations and invest in expanding its platform instead of charging individual users. This would be part of its commitment to improving service for all customers. Clear, upfront disclosure of costs should be required if Aftership maintains this fee structure. If Aftership truly values its customers, this change must ensure a fair, transparent, and customer-centric experience.

Brand noted they’d like to be able to clearly communicate why certain Products are on the Blocklist - instead of the general text we have in place, without specifically making the customer review the Policy as a whole. Asking if we could define the error at the Blocklist Product Tag entry level. If the value is left blank, use default content.   Current state: After end consumer logs in with Order, non returnable items are greyed and out and we show at the line level a message that states "Does not comply with our return policy."   Desired State: After end consumer logs in with Order, non returnable items are greyed and out and we show at the line level a message from a configurable setting within RC where we can pass SKU or Product Category specific messages that state why an item is nt returnable like "Digital Goods are not returnable" or "Bundled Item cannot be returned" or "Last years models are not returnable but warranty available".   We'd like to be able to configure our own blocklist message for order item display when the end consumer logs into RC.

It would be great if we could allow the discount to carry over to the new order if a customer is just exchanging a size, at the moment our customer is choosing to refund rather then exchange sizing because they have to pay the difference between the original discounted price and the price. 

That would be great if Feed could accommodate the listing of "not-for-sale products" on TTS. This feature is newly introduced in TTS, where the product is not for sale to shoppers but will be gifted to them instead.

Hi there,    We’re planning to fully transition to your warranty return platform and would like to see the following improvements: * Dynamic Reference Lines on Return Shipping Labels: We’d like the option to add customizable reference lines on shipping labels. While there are default placeholders available, we need a more flexible solution to include internal notes that will help us organize returns efficiently. * Delayed Replacement Order Processing: We’d prefer the ability to process a replacement order without sending it to Shopify until the carrier marks the warranty return as “en route.” * Regex Validation for Warranty Intake Form: Adding regex validation would help us ensure inputs follow specific formats, such as order numbers or serial numbers, for better accuracy.

Would you be able to: 1. Add a functionality that restricts order views based on a ship from location or/or login? We have multiple ship from locations and we are 100% manula orders; it creates confusion when one warehouse sees orders from another warehouse.  2. Have a ship to address book and have that be varied based on ship from locations. We have set ship to locations and it doesnt change often. 

Like to set their own “Image not found” image for Products in the Returns Portal. That way, If a Product is not sent to AfterShip with an Image URL, they have an image that looks more branded.   Today, when an item does have an img url, the Return Portal defaults to the missing image icon.   Request - have a function within Return Portal where if any items on my return portal dont have an image URL, it can set to a image that I select instead of defaulting to the standard broken/no image icon.