| Discussion Forum: Thread 335251 |
|
 |
| | | Author: | brickmover  | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:02 | | Subject: | IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 66 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| I recently sold a set, with box but very small, like you could probably fit six
of the set in a medium flat rate priority box- medium flat rate would be totally
overkill.
1. Total BL weight for the single item ordered, set manually in my inventory
to account for minimal shipping box weight: 13oz.
2. Even with 10% shipping weight margin bump om my regular Priority Mail method,
this would still come in under a pound.
3. My shipping methods are grouped together in my settings so that only the one
chosen by the IC shipping algorithm is offered.
Because one pound (or even a bit heavier) is cheaper in my Priority Mail method
brackets than my Priority Mail medium flat rate method, and volume seems irrelevant
in this case, I expected the regular Priority Mail method to be chosen by the
algorithm. I actually tweaked my methods and inventory weight in advance to make
sure it would come out as intended because the buyer had inquired about ordering
a particular item. So I was completely ready, and it still didn't work like
I thought it would.
Does anyone know why it might choose medium flat rate when a clearly cheaper,
low-weight method with no weight or dimension restrictions at play, was available?
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | wildchicken13 | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:07 | | Subject: | Re: IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, brickmover writes:
| | I recently sold a set, with box but very small, like you could probably fit six
of the set in a medium flat rate priority box- medium flat rate would be totally
overkill.
1. Total BL weight for the single item ordered, set manually in my inventory
to account for minimal shipping box weight: 13oz.
2. Even with 10% shipping weight margin bump om my regular Priority Mail method,
this would still come in under a pound.
3. My shipping methods are grouped together in my settings so that only the one
chosen by the IC shipping algorithm is offered.
Because one pound (or even a bit heavier) is cheaper in my Priority Mail method
brackets than my Priority Mail medium flat rate method, and volume seems irrelevant
in this case, I expected the regular Priority Mail method to be chosen by the
algorithm. I actually tweaked my methods and inventory weight in advance to make
sure it would come out as intended because the buyer had inquired about ordering
a particular item. So I was completely ready, and it still didn't work like
I thought it would.
Does anyone know why it might choose medium flat rate when a clearly cheaper,
low-weight method with no weight or dimension restrictions at play, was available?
|
Without being able to see your shipping settings, it's difficult to say why
the instant checkout algorithm chose the medium flat rate box. However, if you
have an interested buyer, you could always reserve the item for them, set it
to manual only, and send them an invoice with the desired shipping cost.
Hope that helps.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | brickmover | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:14 | | Subject: | Re: IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Shipping, brickmover writes:
| | I recently sold a set, with box but very small, like you could probably fit six
of the set in a medium flat rate priority box- medium flat rate would be totally
overkill.
1. Total BL weight for the single item ordered, set manually in my inventory
to account for minimal shipping box weight: 13oz.
2. Even with 10% shipping weight margin bump om my regular Priority Mail method,
this would still come in under a pound.
3. My shipping methods are grouped together in my settings so that only the one
chosen by the IC shipping algorithm is offered.
Because one pound (or even a bit heavier) is cheaper in my Priority Mail method
brackets than my Priority Mail medium flat rate method, and volume seems irrelevant
in this case, I expected the regular Priority Mail method to be chosen by the
algorithm. I actually tweaked my methods and inventory weight in advance to make
sure it would come out as intended because the buyer had inquired about ordering
a particular item. So I was completely ready, and it still didn't work like
I thought it would.
Does anyone know why it might choose medium flat rate when a clearly cheaper,
low-weight method with no weight or dimension restrictions at play, was available?
|
Without being able to see your shipping settings, it's difficult to say why
the instant checkout algorithm chose the medium flat rate box. However, if you
have an interested buyer, you could always reserve the item for them, set it
to manual only, and send them an invoice with the desired shipping cost.
Hope that helps.
|
That's a good idea too.
Also just figured it out. I had hastily added the weight-based method and accidentally
entered values for pounds instead of for ounces. Of course I was going to see
the obvious only after I typed out my issue in detail lol.
False alarm! 
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | wildchicken13 | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:20 | | Subject: | Re: IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, brickmover writes:
| | That's a good idea too.
Also just figured it out. I had hastily added the weight-based method and accidentally
entered values for pounds instead of for ounces. Of course I was going to see
the obvious only after I typed out my issue in detail lol.
False alarm!
|
No worries, I'm glad you got it figured out. Sometimes silly mistakes happen.
Is the buyer able to get the cheaper shipping now?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | brickmover | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:52 | | Subject: | Re: IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 24 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Shipping, brickmover writes:
| | That's a good idea too.
Also just figured it out. I had hastily added the weight-based method and accidentally
entered values for pounds instead of for ounces. Of course I was going to see
the obvious only after I typed out my issue in detail lol.
False alarm!
|
No worries, I'm glad you got it figured out. Sometimes silly mistakes happen.
Is the buyer able to get the cheaper shipping now?
|
Yeah though the order had already gone through. I suppose the frustrating thing
about IC is the inability to test it on one's own store. I had attempted
to do so first by adding to my cart in my own store, hoping I'd be able to
at least see the estimated shipping method/cost. I knew I couldn't buy from
my own store, but it's too bad they don't show that info while disabling
the purchase button. It would be super helpful for testing changes as a seller.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | wildchicken13 | | Posted: | Feb 20, 2023 23:59 | | Subject: | Re: IC shipping method selection | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, brickmover writes:
| | Yeah though the order had already gone through. I suppose the frustrating thing
about IC is the inability to test it on one's own store. I had attempted
to do so first by adding to my cart in my own store, hoping I'd be able to
at least see the estimated shipping method/cost. I knew I couldn't buy from
my own store, but it's too bad they don't show that info while disabling
the purchase button. It would be super helpful for testing changes as a seller.
|
Indeed, it's hard to debug instant checkout without being able to test it
yourself. Better yet, allow sellers to simulate the order process from start
to finish. I suppose the development effort may be too great for BrickLink.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Colorado
