Each supplier has a record, a history of how much has already been paid, and what your team thought of them on the last trip. That judgment shows up again at choosing time; it doesn't sit forgotten in a WhatsApp conversation.
Hotel, bus company, roadside restaurant, guide, incoming operator. Everyone you hire for a trip is registered once, with contact, city, and the agency's notes, and is then picked by name on the screens instead of typed in again for every departure.
From there, two things happen on their own: the cost logged for the trip stays linked to the supplier, and what the team rated after the trip comes back at the next choice.
You don't pick the category by hand on every entry, so the report never ends up with the same expense in two different drawers.
It goes in as Lodging. It's the same record the rooming list uses to group rooms.
It goes in as Transportation. The bus company, the transfer van, the flight leg.
It goes in as Meals. The stopover restaurant, the lunch included in the package.
It goes in as Guide. Local guide, route guide, credentialed conductor.
It goes in as Activities. Incoming operator, admission ticket, an attraction on the itinerary.
It goes in as Others. There's also the Marketing category, for costs that don't come from an operations supplier.
Offline visual prototype · the example suppliers and data are fictional.
Each supplier has its own page with the registration data, the total already paid across all trips, how many services they provided, and the list of every payment with its corresponding trip.
Below that are the team's comments, which are not the trip review: they're free-form notes about the supplier, the kind that today live in one person's head and vanish when that person goes on vacation.
When the trip ends, the retrospective asks for feedback on every supplier that took part in it. The trip's hotels are already on the list by themselves; you add the rest from the catalog. Each one gets a rating of good, fair, or poor, plus a free-form comment.
It's not just a star. What happened is written next to the rating, and it's what was written that serves as a warning six months later.
When picking the hotel for the next trip, the latest rating shows up right there in the selection list, with the name of the trip where it happened and the comment that was left.
The system counts how many times that supplier was good, fair, and poor across all the agency's trips, and flags anyone with a poor rating in their history.
That's the piece a spreadsheet doesn't have. In a spreadsheet, disappointment with a hotel becomes a message in the team group and disappears within two weeks. Here it comes back exactly when someone is about to hire them again.
So you can decide based on what exists, not on what would sound better on a website.
The contract OnWay generates is the passenger's. A contract between the agency and the hotel or bus company is neither stored nor generated here.
The rating is good, fair, or poor, with a count of each. There are no stars and no zero-to-ten average, on purpose: with few trips per year, an average becomes a number that fakes precision.
The amount goes in as a cost logged to the trip, and the history shows what was paid on each one. There's no table of negotiated rates that the system applies on its own.
Six: hotel, transportation, food, guide, activity, and other. The type automatically defines which of the seven cost categories the expense falls into, so the same kind of expense doesn't end up in two different drawers in the report.
It does. Each supplier has a page with the total already paid across all trips, how many services they provided, and the list of every payment with its corresponding trip.
In the trip's retrospective, every supplier that took part gets a rating of good, fair, or poor, plus a free-form comment. The trip's hotels are already on the list by themselves, and you add the rest from the catalog.
When choosing the hotel for the next trip, the latest rating appears in the selection list itself, with the name of the trip where it happened and the written comment. The system also counts how many times that supplier was good, fair, and poor across all trips.
No. The rating is good, fair, or poor, with a count of each. It's a design decision: with few trips per year, a numeric average fakes a precision the data doesn't have.
No. The contract OnWay generates is the passenger's. A contract between the agency and the supplier is neither generated nor stored.
Not today. The amount goes in as a cost logged to the trip, and the supplier's history shows what was paid on each one.
Bring the list of hotels and bus companies you work with, and we'll show you the record, the cost linked to each trip, and the rating coming back at the next choice.
I want to see the suppliers Back to home