I work in the furniture industry with thousands of products and continuous new product listings. Consumers often inquire about variations in materials and sizes between similar pieces of furniture, placing a significant burden on my support team. Generating comparison pages for every query we receive is unfeasible due to the volume of requests. Given the potential of AI to suggest comparable items, could it also be leveraged to pinpoint disparities among products and present these distinctions to consumers? Such a system can alleviate my workload significantly and potentially reduce bounce rates as well.

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.

Is it possible to increase the bulk search limit from 50? We often have to peform bulk search a number of times to retrieve the data that we're looking.

The “Back” button on the RC portal is not obvious or prominent enough. It is too hard to find and blends into the page.

Upload label manually from external source and link (instead of file only) Today its only possible to upload label manually through file via computer. Hope this will change and we ca upload via external url

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.

When I receive tracking from suppliers, I add manually to AfterShip. Usually there's more than 1 tracking number, for the same courier, so it would be great to able to add multiple tracking numbers at the same time as comma separated. When clicking Save, it would then use all the information entered, for example; Customer name, order number etc etc. Below example for tracking number 123456789 and 987654321

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.

When exporting, it would be handy if there was a third Data Format option. In addition to Standard and Custom, something like “Same as current display” or something like that. An option that would create the csv or xlsx file with the same columns in the same order that are displayed in the current view on the web page. I find myself adding or removing columns in the dashboard in order to see what I want to look at but, if I want to then export it, I need to either recreate the view again in the export wizard (which isn’t always even possible) or export it standard and move stuff around in excel.

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.