As stated, if the setup mentioned above by 2 separate users is not working that way, then either contact helpdesk for an immediate investigation or report it to bugtracker and wait for 6 months to see a fix. If helpdesk determines it's a bug then there shouldn't be any charge.
I have tried this but it doesn't do what I need. If an item is 10kg, the shipping cost comes out as £8.50. It seems it is working it out as Base price + (Full product weight*0.35) instead of Base price + (additional weight after 5kg*0.35) where the additional weight in this example is 5kg. I hope this makes sense?
I see the issue. It is not a bug, just the system designed so. Additional custom development work is required to solve the issue
It seems the problems with the shipping mechanism haven't been fixed since cscart was first released.... (at least since v2 in my experience) . Also see Bug report:
Manual Method is it lacking in many features.
The program flow is all wrong, which creates issues, from memory, it selects the method then the location or such like.
- Wont work well with base weight factor of 1 (gms) - (v4 issue)
- Cant have overlapping Locations, even if they are disabled. - (havent tested in v4)
- Doesn't calculate Percentage properly. - (v4 issue)
- No Volume mass calculator as is needed for Auspost. - (shortcoming)
- Cant Clone a Shipping Method! - addon?
Things seem very quite lately!
Why this issue is not being addressed seriously by CS-Cart Team? This is a feature that must work well in the first place. There's no use of this Shipping mechanism if it will not work as it should be.
They closed my bug report without any consideration. .. said "working as designed" ! Which of course means "faulty by design" since in some conditions it does not work.
Reopened with another bug report:
https://forum.cs-cart.com/tracker/issue-7519-shipping-manual-calculator-weight-dependencies-2-bugs/
We have over 200 vendors in our multivendor, generally vendors are ok with adding products, but everyone has said "what the hell, how do we setup shipping", we ask vendors to give us their shipping cost and we set it up for them
at the moment we are only in 1 country, i am scared to think how we will make our marketplace international!!!
We have over 200 vendors in our multivendor, generally vendors are ok with adding products, but everyone has said "what the hell, how do we setup shipping", we ask vendors to give us their shipping cost and we set it up for them
at the moment we are only in 1 country, i am scared to think how we will make our marketplace international!!!
I have brought the same issue many times, the problem is programmers don't understand real-life issues because they are not operating a mutlivendor platform like you and I..
I have brought the same issue many times, the problem is programmers don't understand real-life issues because they are not operating a mutlivendor platform like you and I..
It's not limited to multi-vendor. Cs-cart shipping methodology is just so different than anywhere else. It took years to get dimensional weight supported and I don't even thing it's supported in the manual shipping methods. So this isn't just an MVE issue.
It's not limited to multi-vendor.
But it's in MV alone that vendors can be from different countries. Then having the same shipping zones for all will be simply disaster. Shipping method selector will be spinning like in a magnetic tempest and finally the customer will have to choose between hundreds of shipping zones with his country in. Of course such marketplace is doomed to 00 conversion.
In contrast to my criticism of CSC's Shipping Mechanism over the years a little testing indicates that the issues regarding overlapping locations (zones) have been improved, in v4.
The old issue was with Manual Methods, having some postcodes for Zone_1 also in Zone_2 (overlapping zones) then having , for example methods Shipping-Regular_1 and Shipping-Express_2 for the same supplier, would confuse the SM and result in no shipping method being offered to the customer.
This is fixed, at least now the customer is offered the cheapest method....in line with the documentation.
However it is still unreliable as to whether the customer will be shown all shipping methods in situations where, for example, Courier_1's zones overlap, in some situations it offers both, sometimes only the cheapest.
Update.. Actually, I found still problematic after more testing.
the issues regarding overlapping locations (zones) have been improved, in v4.
Not in MV edition to my knowledge. If you have set up shipping zones and rates for 3 vendors from different countries, they will all appear as options to select from for any buyer. Suppose the customer is from India, and we have defined SZ for vendors from AU, USA and China. We have set up manually 3 different shipping zones for each seller - one for domestic delivery, one for continental delivery and one for worldwide shipping. Now, these 9 shipping zones will appear as variants in the Shipping charges tab while setting the shipping methods of any vendor. How is this not overlapping?!
Well, it's not overlapping - it's rather explicit shipping promiscuity. And we are all in deep shit.
It should present the shipping options for each vendor where there are products in the cart where the location (customer's location) is supported by the method. These are separate shipping methods for each vendor. Vendors without items in the cart will NOT have their shipping methods shown. The customer must select one from each vendor.
Vendors select which merchant ("all vendors") shipping methods they want to support. Those will be included along with their own in each vendor's section of the order for the customerto choose from. If an order contains 2 items (1 from each of 2 vendors) and the following config exists:
vendor1 -> private shipping method V1 vendor1 -> chooses to use merchant's shipping method M1 vendor2 -> private shipping method V2
When the customer gets to the shipping section on checkout they' should see:
Items from Vendor 1: [x] V1 - $3 (5 days) [ ] M1 - $5 (3 days) Items from Vendor 2 [x] V2 - $8 (3-5 days)
Then, when the order is submitted by the customer, 2 child orders are created. One for each vendor. Each of those has the appropriate shipping method related to each vendor's items. No one sees the parent order after that. payment, items, shipping, and taxes are all done individually.
if you system is not behaving this way, then there is a problem.
if you system is not behaving this way, then there is a problem.
There is no integration with shippers. Everything is manual. Each vendor should set up their own rates for the different shipping zones. Or let the admin define which vendor is to use the zone, like in the products created by the admin for the sake of this or that vendor. This however we cannot do. Even in the new upcoming permissions table vendor can only view the Rate areas and Taxes, not manage them. If you can develop an add-on to allow vendors define their own shipping zones (aka Locations, or Rate areas in 10.1.x), I will gladly buy it.
To help you understand our predicament, here is my short review for Capterra
https://www.capterra.com/p/172642/CS-Cart-Multi-Vendor/
hi,
I have read the thread , and wondering if anything has gotten better/changed since.
I am working on making the platform working with sellers in all countries in europe , shipping everywhere. but It does not seem very intuitive to get to do that on my side.
thank you for your return !
Hi can any one guide me, how I can change shipping functionality.
I want to calculate shipping cost on total weight instead of vendor according shipping
Hi can any one guide me, how I can change shipping functionality.
I want to calculate shipping cost on total weight instead of vendor according shipping
Not sure what you mean by "instead of vendor according shipping".
Shipping Rate Percentages?
Can anyone tell my why were Shipping rate Calculations based on order percentage was removed from CS-Cart?
All our shipping methods are based on percentage of order value.
What is the workaround? Is there an add-on that will put percentages back as an option.
Can't really understand why it would be removed?