Yes sir. Me and my old diesel truck are just doing our part to try and kill off anything left.
--- In [email protected], "Orin Rehorst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Green Kool-Aid drinker alert! > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > casest97217 > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:37 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [EDI-L] Re: SCAC CODE LIST > > > > And to think that I've been neglecting the standards committees in > their time of greatest need for the fight on Global Warming; How > selfish of me, I feel so ashamed. :) Stephen > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L% 40yahoogroups.com> , "David > Frenkel" <frenkel@> wrote: > > > > 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:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> ] On > Behalf Of > > Craig Dunham > > Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:14 AM > > To: [email protected] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> > > 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] > > > > > > > > [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/
