Share your ideas with us

Seems like a basic thing, but when I have an enhancement I'd like to submit, I want to ensure I don't duplicate someone else's submission.  Obviously that's why there is an 'upvote' button.  The only way to determine if there is something worth upvoting is to scroll through the entire list from top to bottom.

Some customers enter +1 before their phone number when requesting a return or exchange. This causes the shipping label to fail to generate and creates frustration for the customer and extra work for me. I would like the system to correct the phone number to allow successful label generation.

Good morning, I kindly ask you to enable the option to change the font, font size, colour, etc., for the “address” field within the footer of notification emails. Currently, this is the only field that cannot be customised, which creates a noticeable contrast between the main text in the body and this field, making the emails aesthetically unappealing. Thank you.

Show all packages to a us zip code

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.

It would be very helpful to have an option to group orders by store/company name (e.g., all Amazon orders together, all eBay orders together, etc.). This way, I could collapse or expand groups and quickly view only the orders I want. Additionally, it would be great if users could create their own custom groups for even more flexibility.

As a business owner, I am seeking a system that can facilitate risk level scoring for each RMA (Return Merchandise Authorization) and enable my staff to input risk assessment findings based on actual RMA inspections. This system will enable us to assess risk levels effectively and respond accordingly. Moreover, the system will allow for the reporting of any detected fraud instances.   Implementing this system is crucial for mitigating fraud occurrences, as well as proactively preventing future fraudulent activities. Such measures are instrumental in safeguarding my business's profitability in the long term.

The same videos are displayed to shoppers on my collection page or recommendation widgets. I want greater exposure to alternative products and videos, but selecting which ones to display and updating them regularly feels overwhelming.   Furthermore, testing to determine which video garners the most traffic is even more challenging. I have no idea if my efforts will result in sales. If only there is a tool could help!

1. What is the context?  * We are currently a Premium plan subscriber operating a high-volume merchant shipping 68% of our Canadian orders via GLS Canada. We are looking to utilize the Enhanced MPS Visibility feature to improve our customer experience.   * Currently, your documentation lists carriers like FedEx, UPS, and DHL as supported for MPS, but GLS Canada is excluded. When we contacted support, we were told this is due to "carrier limitations.   2. What issue do you want to address? We believe the "carrier limitation" rationale may be outdated or incorrect because AfterShip is already successfully pulling data for GLS child packages. * Evidence: On GLS Canada tracking number P97186751, AfterShip retrieves events for both Package 1 (Delivered Nov 21) and Package 2 (Delivered Nov 19). * The Problem: Because GLS Canada is not on your "Supported Carriers" list for MPS logic, your system aggregates these distinct events into a single "scrambled" timeline instead of separating them into tabs. * The Gap: The data exists in your system; the parsing logic to separate "Master" vs. "Child" is simply missing for this specific carrier. 3. What outcome do you expect? * We request that the product team add GLS Canada to the Enhanced MPS Visibility supported carrier list * We need the system to recognize the child packages it is already detecting and display them in separate tabs (Piece 1, Piece 2), just as it does for FedEx or UPS.   4. Who will benefit from your idea? * Merchants: This allows Canadian merchants to use your Enterprise MPS features for their dominant carrier, reducing support tickets regarding "confusing" status updates. * AfterShip: It improves the value of your Enterprise plan for the Canadian market by supporting the region's major logistics provider.

Currently OTD report, reports the complete journey so the avereage time can fluctuate based on how long it takes for customers to collect their order.  We need to report on the carrier performance and then the time it takes to collect.  It would be good to have  a PUDO report that breaks down : average transit time to collection point   Average time waiting for collection    If we expand our PUDO options in Europe it would be a good indication