RateHawk vs. WeTravel

I would suggest RateHawk to other business owners who are concerned with their coverage and reliability in booking. It does not create unneeded complexity to facilitate growth.

I would highly recommend WeTravel to other fitness instructors and studio owners looking to help organize their retreat registration websites, information, and make payment processing simple and easy!

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• High quality back-office support for managing bookings and accessing important data
• Wide geography for transfers: RateHawk offers transfers in over 149 countries and 1,100 cities and towns. This extensive coverage ensures that the travel agents can provide reliable transfer services to their clients almost anywhere in the world.
• High Quality Service: RateHawk ensures that transfers drivers undergo a careful selection process and maintain high ratings. This commitment to quality helps ensure a positive experience for travelers.
• Having all travel services managed under a single platform and billed in a single invoice.

• Customer Service is top notch and incredibly responsive to any tech issues or questions.
• WeTravel is constantly improving their softwares’ functionality and adding new features for payment collection in multiple currencies, vendor payouts, registrant information collection, etc.
• Their fees are only about 1% of your trip’s revenue, which is much less than Square or PayPal.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Paying for the service as well as fees for services of third party entities such as lodging, transportation, and activities depending on the type of client using the service.
• May have a learning curve for new users due to its extensive features.

• Refunds. I'd like to be able to refund any amount of the trip cost, not just payments in full. For example, someone puts down a $500 trip deposit. WeTravel only gives me the option to refund that $500 in full, not partially.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

It is easy to use and the support is always there to help.

RateHawk is much more user friendly. Because of Vinet America’s Customization options to tailor the platform to a specific agency’s needs, the process could require an agency to have their own IT staff to complete this process, which could leave smaller agencies at a loss with their services.

WeTravel is far superior to PayPal. Their fees are much less, and they offer so much more than just payment processing. They are a huge asset in helping me manage all the retreats we run, organize information and room availability, and process payments

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Time is saved in the process of keeping up with separate bills, bookings, and record keeping. This can mean the difference between closing a deal or losing it.
• All costs are consolidated under one invoice and professionally recorded without paying your own staff or secretary salary to have this done.

• Since their fees are minimal (about 1%), we've been able to save money vs. if we went with other payment processers like PayPal or Square.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info