Need some info on Tri State and Panther

[Ken052376]

I appreciate any info on TState and Panther. I just bought a class 8 straight truck and am new to the expedite way of life. I've done tractor trailer for the last 13 years so any info on expedite would be helpful.

I will be running as a solo driver and I stay out for a month at a time. The info I could use are the approx. number of miles I can expect in a month and the good and bad for both companies.

Thank you in advance,

Ken

 

[Yesteryear]

Both Tri-State and Panther are good carrier. Both have cons and pros. The best thing you can do before deciding which carrier to go with is to call a recruiter from each carrier to see which would be the best fit to match your personal needs. Remember what is a good fit for one driver may not be for another. Only you know what your needs and requirements are.

 

[Ken052376]

I agree 100% with not all companies perfect for everybody. I have talked to recruiters from both companies but you know they are only going to tell you the good usually. Personally I am thinking Panther because they are paying mileage pay compared to percentage at Tstate.

Can anybody tell me anything negative about panther, ie nonpaying etc.?

Thank you for the reply Yesteryear

 

[Yesteryear]

Panther has no issues with paying their contractors that I've heard of. Panther is a very good carrier. Have friends that are drivers for them. Their only issue is they are not getting very many miles. Averaging around 1000 to 2000 a week. Got to understand they came out of the big truck, were driving for prime if I remember right.
They did not understand the difference from trucking to expediting. Hotspots, positioning, what loads to or not to take, ect so a lot of it was their fault. For instance they did not know they could do a radius check to see how many loads went out of a location and how many trucks were available.
Nearly had a heart attack when they told me how many miles they were getting, they though they were doing good. lol When I asked them about positioning they had no idea what I was talking about. Now that they know we'll see if their milage goes up. So, what I'm saying is make sure you know the in's and out's of the carrier, how to make the carrier work for you.

 

[Pilgrim]

Keep in mind that Tri State is a small, privately owned company that's not nearly as financially sound as Panther. It takes deep pockets to survive tough times like we're in now, and Panther is in a good position. Also, don't limit yourself to these two carriers - there are several others that seem to be well positioned to survive these recessionary times, so make sure to explore all your options.

 

[eggd1ver]

Just a litte heads up ask if you as a single driver and owener will get the same miles as a fleet driver. Me and my wife drive for panther an have very few complants but its like every other company you won't like every thing about them if you did you would own the company. I would not look just at these to companys. we look for six months before going with panther and we went with a fleet owner almost bought a class 8 truck before doing what we did. Do your homework this is a different animal then general frieght. I drove that for awhile. Good luck and be safe out there.

RICK & IDA PARKER
PANTHER DRIVERS

 

[TSexpediter]

I'm not sure what a class 8 means (I'm the accountant, don't kill me) but send me a PM if you need Panther mileage for single driver straight truck 22' box for the last months.
We have only vans with TriState, they are doing a little less than those with Panther.

 

[Dakota]

I'm not sure what a class 8 means (I'm the accountant, don't kill me) but send me a PM if you need Panther mileage for single driver straight truck 22' box for the last months.
We have only vans with TriState, they are doing a little less than those with Panther.

Class 8 is a converted semi tractor, converted into straight truck

Not sure if it matters but letting us know what state your in might help out on which company might be best for you

 

[Wingnut]

Keep in mind that Tri State is a small, privately owned company that's not nearly as financially sound as Panther. It takes deep pockets to survive tough times like we're in now, and Panther is in a good position. Also, don't limit yourself to these two carriers - there are several others that seem to be well positioned to survive these recessionary times, so make sure to explore all your options.

Uuuhhhhhh I have no idea where you get your information from BUT just because Tri-State is a small, privately owned company it doesn't mean that they aren't as financially sound as one of the bigger carriers. In fact, did it ever occur to you that maybe Tri-State is BETTER financially sound than some larger carriers? FYI, Tri-State is NOT in any financial crisis and is doing just as good as they have always been. This is a classic case of how nasty rumors get started.
Tri-State is an EXCELLANT carrier and goes out of their way to treat all their drivers and owners with the upmost respect and courtesy. They have high ethics and morals, which is more than I can say for some other carriers...which I know for a FACT since I have trucks on with Tri-State and another carrier.

 

[Pilgrim]

I got my information from people who work for Tri State - not drivers-standing-around-at-the-truckstop-gossip, mind you, but employees of the company who are in a position to know what's going on. The purpose of my post was not to besmirch Tri State or imply they're circling the drain, but to encourge Ken052376 to check out a variety of expedite companies both large and small and to make sure the company he chooses is financially stable. Granted, being owned by a larger parent company isn't necessarily a sign that the company is profitable - we all remember what happened to Con-Way Now.

 

[The Enemy]

SO I take it that in office employee gossip is more credible than what owners know. I have to say that in the 3+ years I have been an owner with Tri State, I have only been let down a couple of times. Part of that was my fault, I was stubborn and didn't go where they suggested to go for freight, so I sat. But over all I honestly wouldn't go work for another company. They have gone above and beyond to keep us and all of their drivers happy, and have gone out of their way to help us out when needed. Yes, Tri State might have a few warts that others don't agree with, but so does every other company. Personally speaking, the size of the company doesn't mean anything, if they can keep their drivers and employees happy thats all that matters. Plus the fact that they have been around so long without being owned by a huge multi trillion $$$$$ company says that they are doing something right.

You guys are right, TS isn't for everyone, but its right for us.

 

[Turtle]

"Granted, being owned by a larger parent company isn't necessarily a sign that the company is profitable - we all remember what happened to Con-Way Now."

Good example of an unfounded rumor that will likely never go away. Con-Way NOW was, in fact, very profitable. Their P&L sheets unambiguously showed as much. Profitability played little in the decision to sell that division, as well as a few other divisions of the parent company, in preparation to move back to their core LTL business and with their purchase of CFI. The profitable divisions they sold, the unprofitable divisions they either sold off the assets or simply incorporated those into the core truckload business.

As to the salient comment (and the reading comprehension of many), the comment was, "Keep in mind that Tri State is a small, privately owned company that's not nearly as financially sound as Panther."

It's simply a statement that Tri-State is smaller than Panther, which may or may not mean anything, it's privately owned as compared to Panther, which may or may not mean anything, and it's not as financially well off as Panther, which likewise may or may not mean anything. But, knowing what I know, all three are true statements. Do not infer anything beyond that like, for example, that Tri-State is somehow not financially well off. Even without knowing some of the facts, if you had to pick one or the other, Tri-State or Panther, which one do you think is better positioned financially in the current state of the industry? It's not a question of financially well off or not, yes or no, it's a question of gradation.

It didn't say "Because Tri-State is a small, privately owned company, that means they aren't as financially sound as one of the bigger carriers." It didn't even hint that "just because" anything. Nor did it generically compare Tri-State, or small carriers in general, to that of bigger carriers. It was a simple statement comparing two specific carriers. That's all.

"Personally speaking, the size of the company doesn't mean anything, if they can keep their drivers and employees happy thats all that matters."

That's true. Nor does the size of a company necessarily have any direct bearing on how financially sound they are. Nor does going out of their way to treat all their drivers and owners with the upmost respect and courtesy, or having an abundance of ethics and morals, have anything to do with how financially sound they are. The same as whether a company is privately owned or owned by a "huge multi trillion $$$$$ company" have any bearing whatsoever on whether or not they are doing something right.

"Tri-State is NOT in any financial crisis and is doing just as good as they have always been."

They may not be in any financial crisis, but, if they are doing just as good now as they have always been, then they are uniquely unique in the industry.


My, my, my, such emotions over a carrier. And from a bunch of people who call themselves independent contractors who shouldn't care one wit about what others think in any case.

 

[bluejaybee]

Turtle,

No wonder why you have to live in a shell. Such wisdom and knowledge could certainly not be contained in a normal skull. I never try to decipher a post on my own. I wait and let you do it for me. Always, in detail and length.

 

[FIS53]

I disagree with Turtle in the assessment of "financially sound". Someone stating that a company is not as financially sound as another implies and in fact says it is not so good financially! Being financially sound for a smaller company is quite different from a large corp with lots of people to pay for.

2 companies I've worked for have both been hit this recession but the smaller one while being only half the size of the other is more financially sound as they've kept their communications costs under control, have fewer bodies in the office, have a more efficient and happier fleet. While the larger company is more technologically advanced its payout for this factor is way higher not only due to quantity but in actual cost per unit on the road. The smaller company is leaner and more cost effective and while going towards more technology for the future they are going slow and watching the costs.

Being financially sound means really what does the company have in reserves and expenditures and can they handle them over this slowdown with reduce income.
Rob

 

[Turtle]

I made no assessment as to what "financially sound" means.

"Someone stating that a company is not as financially sound as another implies and in fact says it is not so good financially!"

Sorry, but no. You may choose to infer that, but that is not what was stated. It may very well have been implied, I don't know, it's not an assumption I'm willing to make, as only the author can speak to that (which he has done, and has said specifically that he wasn't implying anything of the sort). But since the language was specific and clear, there is no reason or need to create an implication that is not there in order to infer something that is likewise not there. Too many people want to read between the lines, make assumptions, create illusory corollaries, and then draw conclusions based on that, where they try and figure out what someone is really, really, really trying to say, instead of simply reading what they said.

Stating that a company is not as financially sound as another means nothing beyond that, and it certain does not mean that the company who isn't as financially sound is somehow not good financially. In order to come to that conclusion, you have to assume facts not in evidence, assume things beyond what was stated, assume the author's thoughts and intent, all in all you have to assume too much. Here's an example using your logic:

Apple isn't as big as Microsoft.

From that, using your logic, Apple is little.

See? It's not a matter of either/or, it's a matter of gradation. Just because Apple isn't AS BIG as Microsoft, it doesn't mean Apple isn't big. They just aren't AS BIG.

The average NBA Forward isn't as tall as the average NBA Center. Therefore, NBA Forwards are Oompa Loompas.

The same logic can be applied to the statement, "You couldn't be more wrong." Someone will inevitably state that "wrong" is an absolute state and is therefore not subject to gradation.

Yet, there ya go, it's a little wrong to call a tomato a vegetable, but it's very wrong to call it a suspension bridge.

Both statements are wrong, it's merely a matter of gradation, as one is more wrong than the other. Or, conversely, one statement isn't as wrong as the other. So while one company may be more financially sound than another, it doesn't mean both of them are not financially sound.

 

[jaminjim]

Or that they are both financially sound.