Share your ideas with us

Items + return reasons are not clearly highlighted/shown as selected, during the Return Request flow on the RC portal.    Request: During the return flow more clearly define that an item/return resolution is selected. i.e. have text say “Selected” or have the box change colour when an item/resolution is selected beyond just the black box. 

So, as a seller who often runs campaigns, I would love to have a cool discount setup that can be customized based on how customers behave.   For example, I could keep discounts hidden for shoppers with shopping carts over $1,000 but display them for those who have smaller carts, so that they would shop more to get a better discount.   This strategy can be effectively applied to our product recommendations, enhancing conversion rates and boosting average order values.

Add the option to pay online ~ $2 at checkout for free returns and extended warranty later.    Add tags to people / allow different RMA flow for those who optin to this. 

In Shopify, merchants cannot identify which orders were combined in TTS. This will increase the risk of merchants repeatedly fulfil the same order items.   To address this issue proactively, I would recommend that we introduce a hint or tag within Shopify to alert merchants about combined orders, thus avoid this situation from happening.

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. 

Consider leveraging Estimated Delivery Dates for Return Shipments as a column on the Returns Dashboard

Currently, AfterShip's webhook outgoing IP list is only available on an HTML documentation page (https://www.aftership.com/docs/tracking/webhook/webhook-outgoing-ips). This makes it impossible to automate IP allowlist management in infrastructure-as-code (IaC) workflows.   Problem: Teams that use IP-based firewalls to secure their webhook endpoints must manually monitor the documentation page for any IP changes and update their firewall rules accordingly. If a change is missed, it can cause webhook delivery failures and broken integrations.   Request: Please publish the webhook outgoing IP list as a dedicated plain-text endpoint — similar to how Cloudflare publishes theirs at https://www.cloudflare.com/ips-v4 — where each IP is returned on a separate line.   This would allow teams to: * Fetch the IP list programmatically as part of their CI/CD or IaC pipelines * Keep firewall allowlists automatically in sync without manual intervention * Avoid service disruptions caused by missed IP changes This is a standard practice among major API providers and would significantly improve the developer experience for customers who manage network security programmatically.

When utilizing an HTML email editor, I aim to display and personalize shipment or order items within my tracking notifications.   This feature would allow shoppers to conveniently view their purchases directly in the email, thereby improving customer satisfaction.

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.

The background is that I sell my products on multiple marketplaces, and each has different return flows that the aftership Returns page cannot handle. It would be much easier if there is a Returns API that can meet my requirements below.   Need: - I need a Returns API to allow creating RMA/return requests without having to use the Returns Page to file it.  - I can call the API and pass the information regarding the Return Reason Resolution, etc in one go.  - Once I call this API, it will return creation in Pending or Auto-Approved Status.