Loadfusion

Nawk

Nawk

Well-Known Member
Nov 10, 2009
2,031
1,128
113
at my desk
30
Has anyone tried this yet ?

www.loadfusion.ca

LoadFusion - Innovative, Ethical, Verified Transport Load Platform

Real-time load board for brokers, carriers, and dispatchers. Verified accounts, ethical onboarding, and transparent pricing.
www.loadfusion.ca www.loadfusion.ca






New LoadFusion Pricing:



1–9 Users → $65 per user
10–19 Users → $60 per user
20–29 Users → $57 per user
30–49 Users → $55 per user
50+ Users → Enterprise pricing (custom built for you)
 
We just signed up and have been playing around. Pretty cool features, and got an easy Demo from the owner. More users will join as it gains traction. It's been free, so why not?
 
Nawk said:
Has anyone tried this yet ?

www.loadfusion.ca

LoadFusion - Innovative, Ethical, Verified Transport Load Platform

Real-time load board for brokers, carriers, and dispatchers. Verified accounts, ethical onboarding, and transparent pricing.
www.loadfusion.ca www.loadfusion.ca






New LoadFusion Pricing:



1–9 Users → $65 per user
10–19 Users → $60 per user
20–29 Users → $57 per user
30–49 Users → $55 per user
50+ Users → Enterprise pricing (custom built for you)
Click to expand...
I think it goes live on the 29th of April. We're going to give it a go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nawk
Michael Ludwig said:
I think it goes live on the 29th of April. We're going to give it a go.
Click to expand...
I'd appreciate your insights Mike (as I most usually do) from a carrier perspective.

We (like most) are on LoadLink but our carrier division doesn't really use the platform as much as our brokerage division does.
 
FWIW ... this one looks like it might have some traction. They seem to want to do everything right like vetting carrier authority and insurance, as well as broker authority and bond filing.
If I had to guess I would say they are going after the cream of the crop of brokers and carriers, and are probably quit happy to leave the basement dwellers to LoadLink.
From what I understand it's a lot cheaper than LL and you are not married to one license/seat per machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shakey
Nawk said:
I'd appreciate your insights Mike (as I most usually do) from a carrier perspective.

We (like most) are on LoadLink but our carrier division doesn't really use the platform as much as our brokerage division does.
Click to expand...
Hey Nawk, I am a cofounder of LoadFusion and would love to give you a demo and/or answer any questions you may have. Thanks Michael and JWSCOOPER, we are definitely trying to do this the right way!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: EricG, Upper Ech and MikeJr
Howdy folks,

Just my 2 cents here and I know it'll be a few months before we find out if this new platform has traction. A few long term members here have looked at it and are hopeful it takes off.

Back when I was in operations for a brokerage, I would send out morning emails, those emails were sent to hundreds of people working at carrier operations. The emails contained usually a joke, photos of my colleagues at Halloween, Christmas or other function, or something about my young son (he's 9 now already), and a listing of the open freight that our dispatch team was working on. Sometimes it opened up a dialogue and got a load booked, but it also was a reminder that we are all people working together to service our mutual customer and that we are all people with families of all dynamics. Of course I was good at remembering to BCC people because nothing like a cc email where everyone replies a thousand times.

If you legit want a second option to LL, why not spread the word about this platform? If you send out mass emails, share the link and maybe, just maybe enough quality carriers and brokers will sign up and make this thing take off. Word of mouth and email is so much bigger than advertising.

Good luck to Mike C on Loadfusion!

Keep well,
Mike
 
  • Love
Reactions: EricG and Mike C
Let’s face it, the real reason why LoadLink is as successful and big as it is, is simply because they were the first Canadian load board. Sure they have added “extra” features over the years, all at extra cost of course, in addition to regular rate increases. However, it remains for all intents and purposes, a simple load board where sellers and buyers of freight services can come together and make a deal. Where they have dropped the ball in my opinion, is their vetting of new clients and their monitoring of existing customers. They let anyone and everyone participate in this on line market, and they respond poorly, if at all, to complaints of fraud, theft, misrepresentation and a host of other criminal activities. As long as the monthly subscription is paid, pretty much anything goes with little to no oversight. I wish this new entrant much success, as there is no question, another viable alternative to Load Link is desperately needed. I will be instructing my operations people to reach out for more info.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: MikeJr and Mike C
Thanks Loaders. We are doing our best to vet and be responsive. We have on onion approach:
Layer 1: We check the users
Layer 2: We will be circulating a list of prospects to the existing community members
Layer 3: Blacklisting - Users can blacklist others and we will be watching. We will reach out to gain an understanding of the situation and act accordingly. If they are doing some shady stuff like double brokering, hijacking loads, non-payment, etc. Then they will be gone. We'd rather lose their money tan lose your trust.
 
Good Question. We us an onion approach:
Layer 1: We do checks on SAFER, Carrier Assure and checking details within their profile items such as looking on a map to ensure they make sense. Like if a 17 truck carrier is in an urban neighbourhood without a yard, we ask questions...
Layer 2: Now that we are live, we will be submitting a list of prospective members to the existing community. They have the opportunity to raise red flags there too.
Layer 3: The Blacklist feature. Users can add companies to their black list and we will be watching. When this happens we will inquire as to why and do an investigation. If the infraction is real and bad enough then they will be out. If it is a lesser infraction, they get a warning. A few warnings add up to a major, and they are out.

We also love feedback! we have made numerous process and platform modifications based on user feedback. We are small, nimble and we genuinely care. So if you have a better idea, we are all ears! :)
 
Mike C said:
Good Question. We us an onion approach:
Layer 1: We do checks on SAFER, Carrier Assure and checking details within their profile items such as looking on a map to ensure they make sense. Like if a 17 truck carrier is in an urban neighbourhood without a yard, we ask questions...
Layer 2: Now that we are live, we will be submitting a list of prospective members to the existing community. They have the opportunity to raise red flags there too.
Layer 3: The Blacklist feature. Users can add companies to their black list and we will be watching. When this happens we will inquire as to why and do an investigation. If the infraction is real and bad enough then they will be out. If it is a lesser infraction, they get a warning. A few warnings add up to a major, and they are out.

We also love feedback! we have made numerous process and platform modifications based on user feedback. We are small, nimble and we genuinely care. So if you have a better idea, we are all ears! :)
Click to expand...
are you aligned with Equifax (or other) that might be ab to provide a simple financial snapshot for the smaller player that might not have access to that information?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shakey
Yeah, that is a trickier one. The circulation of names will help for sure. We are working hand in hand with CVOR and other provincial departments to get direct access to their data and then share it within our platform. We will do the same for SAFER and Carrier Assure too. They will all have tabs under the company profile page so when the users explore the company, they have access to it all in one place. For now I guess we will have to pay for the reports on the carriers from CVOR. Any suggestions are welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shakey
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom