No it is still doing it. Stopped for a while though.
No it is still doing it. Stopped for a while though.
Yeah, that's what they all say...
In four years I've had four donations. Where was yours?
A flat fee was a consideration, but I am looking/hoping for long term viabilty for *everyone* concerned. A once of fee doesn't work when it comes to software - That's why there are upgrade fees for almost all software made available in this manner.
Then there is the question of what is 'reasonable'. Many people think that paying Microsoft a few hundred$$$ every few years for a new version of Windows as being 'reasonable' (personally I prefer the free Linux O/S's).
Other people would think nothing of paying over $1000 for the latest version of PhotoShop (or $500 for an upgrade) - Whoever priced that thought it was 'reasonable'. (I prefer to use The Gimp).
For the last few weeks we have been receving a free copy of the daily newspaper. With the last issue recieved was a card that stated that if we wanted to continue to recieve them we would have to PAY.
Unconscionable!
Call me Scrooge.
Another reasonable approach is to state that I simply cannot continue support under the existing conditions. I either get the support I *need* or the project will fade into oblivion.
There is nothing for me to reconsider.... it is 'crunch' time. (or close to it).
I *cannot* continue the project without TIME, and come October I will effectively lose whatever 'free' time I have available, unless of course I can make the module produce enough of an ongoing income so that it becomes 'paid' time.
So, where are you going to stand in this regard now? Are you going to be like the (expected) 98% of users that will be saying "So long, and thanks for all the fish", or do you plan to make a "voluntary donation" to help keep the service running a little while longer? (For each $5 or $10 you donate I will add an extra month to your server access). :-)
Cheers
Rod
Hi, sotty about the delay in getting back to you.
That *shouldn't* cause the errors that you were getting.
Just deleing the code as you had done should be ok, but the 'neater' way of doing it is via the same setting/option that allows the product weight to be displayed/not displayed.
There is however more to the error that you were getting, and it was something I was *sure* I'd fixed in V2.0.8 (I guess I need to take another look).
Anyway, the problem that produces the "Node no longer exists" error is (was) caused by a bit of unused/experimental code that was accidently left in the 2.0.6 and 2.0.7 releases. It only seems to affect some versions of PHP, and it is related to the XML data - or specifically, my attempt to store/retrieve XML data as a SESSION variable.
The 'cure' is to remove the two lines of code relating to this. One line is located in the main ozpost.php file, and the other is located in the tpl_modules_shipping_estimator.php file.
Look for code that reads
$_SESSION[ozpostXML] = $xmlQuotes (ozpost.php)
and
$xmlQuotes = $_SESSION[ozpostXML] (tpl_modules_shipping_estimator.php file).
Just delete these lines.
Cheers
Rod
It's an interesting discussion. I don't think that this - what amounts to a subscription - fee is all that expensive (approx. the same cost as IceTV or less over 36 months), but of course it adds to the shipping cost overhead. For some it might not be ultimately worthwhile if sales are very low per month, but there are non zencart alternatives where the shipping costs can be manually added. I did this for years. I'm thinking low sale merchants could also work out some kind of range of shipping item buttons or something if they can't live with the static post charges.
But has anyone else noticed that sales have slipped since the latest round of Australia Post increases hit?
It's getting to the point where customers look at the cost price of the item and see the shipping cost ever creeping towards it (I haven't had the courage to increase the purchase price in ten years), and I guess it depends on the kind of customer you attract, but mine have little money (students). So in my case they just fileshare instead of buying the books...but that's another story.
What I am getting at is trying to keep the shipping costs artificially down in order to maintain/increase sales.
But the ozpost shipping costs are naturally *exactly* what the shippers charge.
I am thinking that it might be better for me to absorb some of the increases.
So I wonder in the distant future if Rod could consider a way to tinker percentage-wise with the shipping estimates displayed (yeah, I know I could give discount coupons, but that's messy).
Something like, a choice of percentage to apply between the estimate given by the source and the amount displayed, and shown to the nearest 50c.
I am sure Rod you have enough on your plate at the moment, but somewhere down the track?
Incidentally, those Fastway Courier charges always look a bit on the low side to me (obviously, that's not an issue with me), so I'm wondering exactly where they come from.
At $3 per cup coffee or similar beverage it seems to me that you could easily cover the cost of supporting your websites shipping costs by drinking one less cup per week!
Truly, your argument that an additional expense of less than $10 pm is a serious impediment to your website's viability, is laughable. And if it does threaten your business why are you bothering anyway?
Frankly, the free ride is coming to an end - and everything on the internet will eventually be monetised. That goes for the products and services that many of us have been taking for granted as a god given right - so called open source software and services, like zen-cart and Rod's goodly product.
Why is it so? Because in spite of making it easier than ever for people to donate for a service, not enough are doing so. Simple as that. A guy like Rod ( and I know a few) simply have to earn enough from their efforts to make it worthwhile, yet it seems to me that the people who are bleating about having to pay for this effort aren't calculating the true value of the service to their business compared to the effort that goes into creating and maintaining it.
So now even a reasonable cost is attracting whingers. Bad luck. Write your own code. Discover how hard it is, even without dealing with complaints about its missing features or performance.
For me I'd rather Rod did the heavy lifting for me, so I happily paid up - and drink a little less coffee (briefly).
Instead of the fixed price 'handling fees' ? Or in addition to?
I can't see why not.
http://www.fastway.com.au/1PriceServiceCalc.html
Cheers
Rod
For the reasons I gave earlier, I don't charge handling fees...
...in addition to. A way to automatically - and in ratio - tweak the displayed shipping charges to suit whatever cost a shopowner is willing to absorb (or add-on - 110%? - if that was his commercial decision).Instead of the fixed price 'handling fees' ? Or in addition to?
Back to the paid multi-quote ozpost discussion, another plus is that it gives customers other shipping options, some of which are lower than Austpost. Can't be bad for a max of - what? - $2.50 a week! I think lucidlee makes some very good points.
Why not charge packaging fees instead?
Seriously, depending on what you are selling, and how you package, this can have a serious impact on your bottom line.
$0.80-$1.00 for a padded bag may not seem like much (to you or your customers), but if you do 100 sales per month that's almost $25 per week you've had to somewhat needlessly absorb.
Handling fees have always been a contentious issue, for both merchants and customers.. Most customers don't mind paying a small handling fee, and from the merchants point of view, if it took you just 60 seconds to pack and post an item - That's over 1.5hours over the course of a month (assuming 100 sales). In reality, expect 3-5mins per item... Hmm, up to 10hours per month just to pack. Nothing to be sneezed at.
Sorry, but you've kinda lost me. Can you give an example of you you think this should work? (I was thinking, take the actual shipping cost, add a percentage, then round to nearest 50c).
If I read you correctly, there could be a scenario whereby a merchant could "add on" -110% thus making a $10 shipping quote into a "Free shipping plus $1.00 discount. Please clarify.
Cheers
Rod
Of course, I understand the costs of handling, packaging are real.
But with shipping costs approaching 25% of the total cost in some cases, I am toying with the idea of absorbing some of the shipping cost. A sale is a sale.
Ozpost, however, displays - as it should - the total shipper's charges.
So, for the sake of demonstration, if the actual shipping cost was, say, $10.00, I would like to have a field option of Shipping cost percentage discount. I enter "90%" and the shipping estimator displays: $9.00.
Somewhere I tell customers "Now with 10% shipping discount!".
If I entered "110%" I wouldn't be running that ad, of course!
Maybe it's a dumb idea, but what do others think?
You really are treading 'dangerous' grounds here.. I know that a sale is a sale, but there really does come a time where the sale isn't worth the time or effort it costs to make.
I am well aware of what you are saying about the shipping costs... if you look in our store you'll find a number of items that we sell for a mere $1.00, but the shipping on them is between $5-$10. If we tried to absorb the shipping costs on these we would end up having to pay people to take them off of our hands. Clearly you are not quite in this position yet, but it is something to keep in mind.
So the final equation will be:
(actual_shipping_cost + P&H) - x% ?
or
(actual_shipping_cost - x%) + P&H
Yes, I know you don't charge P&H, but if I implemented this I still need to add it to the equation, even if the value is zero.
As "Joe Customer" I would read this as being "10% off of your *normal* shipping rates, which the cynic in me would assume that you already added AT LEAST 10% to the *ACTUAL* shipping rates.
I know that this isn't your plan or intention, but if people don't know the 'actual' cost, then any discount is pretty meaninless.
I consider this a bit like a store that advertises products "at 50% off" - Yeah, right, what they REALLY mean is that the 'normal' prices are usually double that of the competition - That, or we are simply being screwed by the 'normal' prices anyway.
No, but I suspect you MAY be tempted to offer 'Free Shipping' in order to attract a sale - Not that there is anything wrong with that, BUT, doing so will also give your customers a false impression about the actual value of your products - If you can afford to cover the shipping (or even a part of the shipping), then surely you must be making *at least* that much profit on the item itself. (Of course, the reality is that you are barely breaking even) but your customers won't know (or care) about that.
Until just now I didn't think it was such a dumb idea (it will be relatively easy and painless to implement, which is why I've been pushing you for more specific details)... However, now that I've done my 'devils advocate' by looking at it from a customers perspective I don't really see how it could possibly be good for a merchant.
If you STILL think it is a good idea I'll certainly respect your opinion, and yes, at some stage I could add such a function for you (or at least provide you with the line or two of code that it will take to implement)
Good question.... If anyone else is interested in this please speak up now.. if enough people are interested I'll implement it in the core code, otherwise, as I said, I'll just probably create/release a piece of code that can be pasted in for those that need it. (The idea being that if it isn't in demand then it could be detrimental to add it as another configuration setting/option.
Cheers
Rod
Bookmarks