Craig,

 

You might start a letter writing campaign to your elected officials.  The
vast majority of industrial standards in the US are developed and
administered without government financial assistance.  The eroding
manufacturing base along with mergers and acquisitions have cut into the
membership base of many of these standards organizations including X12.  The
economics of fewer members means higher member fees and higher cost to
purchase finished products, i.e. standards.

Unfortunately e-commerce related standards have not been on the radar of
policy makers to help the SME that cannot afford to purchase the standards
you are discussing that will ultimately help them be more competitive.

 

David Frenkel

 

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Craig Dunham
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [EDI-L] Re: SCAC CODE LIST

 

I, too, am like many in this group that feel that you should defend 
and support the standards. However, I'm also a realist and know 
that too many of these "agencies" realize that they have the public 
by... well, by the *unmentionable body parts* and impose 
astronomical fees and charges to use their "proprietary" data. 
these practices of over-charging for the data ends up meaning that 
far too many people will take far too many short-cuts or just ignore 
the request for the data all-together.

I had found, previously online, a zip file that contained a fairly 
current and accurate SCAC code list in Excel format. I downloaded 
and have used it once or twice. But what I tell all of My trading 
partners, however, when they ask what the SCAC code is and where to 
get it - I point them directly to 'the other source' for the code - 
the freight line/trucking company/shipping service - that they are 
using. Any of these carriers should be aware and know what they're 
own SCAC is.

Yes, the NMFTA has control of the data and may even be so "generous" 
as to give one or two codes at no cost... but by charging hundreds 
and thousands of dollars for controlling this information - that's 
just highway robbery.

And I have a bone of contention in the original post - about having 
the "intelligent conversation" and describing the "benefits from 
using the standard correctly".... For any of us in the EDI world - 
using the standard correctly is simply getting a correct SCAC code 
in the required segments and documents. Period. As EDI people - it 
is not our job to see that this vendor or that supplier or this 
retailer or that distribution center purchases or subscribes to what 
is - arguably - a horribly overpriced collection of data. That is 
left to the person providing the code - and that is on their 
conscience.... It is not our place, as EDI professionals, to 
dictate another company's business practices and tell them that they 
have to subscribe or purchase such data....

Instead, it is the job of our warehouses and distribution centers, 
of our manufacturers and shippers, of our own internal receiving and 
logistics and routing departments to monitor and enforce the 
compliance with NMFTA and their codes. It is their decision to 
require only an NMFTA coded carrier for any shipments and to be 
valid in their status with their SCAC code.

If the NMFTA feels such a need to provide data in such an overpriced 
way and some companies feel the need and drive to purchase said 
overpriced data, that's fine. But they cannot expect the rest of 
the supply chain universe to be the same. I'm fairly sure that the 
NMFTA makes money off of the creation and maintenance of the SCAC 
codes and that UPS and FedEx and Yellow Frieght and all the other 
carriers out there pay regular fees to keep that SCAC code in good 
standing and current. But charging end users of that data - again, 
the suppliers and retailers - too high of a price to access small 
bits of that data is just too much.

Again, is the SCAC data a good requirement and the standard 
important? Yes. But the way that the data is provided - well, 
that's up to each of us individually to decide and implement.

Craig Dunham
EDI Coordinator
Big 5 Sporting Goods.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



...
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, 
<JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>

Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS 
REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix. 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to