Costing methods

Yahoo Archive
1
Moving to standard cost is time consuming but worth it!

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Elizabeth
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 10:51 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Costing methods



Stan,

Last summer my CFO flirted with moving from Average to Standard cost, and we ran into the same issue (we're on 9.04.507A) of the cost rollup taking a manufactured cost instead of the purchase cost on any part with a BOM, regardless of the Part.Typecode setting.

My solution was to create a new Revision for each of the purchased parts that also had a BOM... using the DMT I would "unapproved" the actual revision, then "approve" the StdCost revision, run the standard cost rollup, "unapproved" the StdCost revision, and then "approve" the actual revision. Without the DMT that would be untenable, but with about 4000 affected parts the entire process took only a few hours over the course of a weekend.

Since we'd only need to do the rollup once a year it wouldn't be that much of a big deal. As it turned out, he didn't like how the standard costing got applied in other ways so we're still on average.

I can look back and see if I still have the notes with more detail if you'd like.

Ernie Lowell
Diba Industries

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "stanchmura" <schmura@...<mailto:schmura@...>> wrote:
>
> I've just begun with Epicor 9.05.701 in Jan of '13 coming from Vantage 6.1 that I've had since 1999.
> I've encountered some differences in costing that caused quite a mess of our financial reporting.
> First, I have a family of parts marked as Purchased/Average cost. These also have a BOM for those rare times when a quick turnaround or low volume is needed. For that, we do an in-house make vs. the usual purchase. Unfortunately, when there is an approved BOM, the (much higher) cost from that is applied to all transactions on the part and the cost is rolled up to the parent.
> I contacted Epicor and was advised there is an option in Plant Cost config to ignore methods in roll up for purchased parts. OK with that. Except for the fact that the part set up in Vantage 6.1 was what is what dictated the cost method used, irrespective of any other items associated with the part.
>
> Similarly, I am now finding that if you have a manufactured part marked in part set up for Average costing, and it has an approved BOM, the part set up again is ignored and the BOM cost is used. I am awaiting an Epicor response on this one, but if true, this means that if you manufacture parts and have BOMs the only cost method choice available is Standard. That defies logic.
>
> Anyone have any feedback to share of similar experiences, advice, workarounds, or another magic check box? That would be greatly appreciated!
> Thanks!
>
> Stan
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
I've just begun with Epicor 9.05.701 in Jan of '13 coming from Vantage 6.1 that I've had since 1999.
I've encountered some differences in costing that caused quite a mess of our financial reporting.
First, I have a family of parts marked as Purchased/Average cost. These also have a BOM for those rare times when a quick turnaround or low volume is needed. For that, we do an in-house make vs. the usual purchase. Unfortunately, when there is an approved BOM, the (much higher) cost from that is applied to all transactions on the part and the cost is rolled up to the parent.
I contacted Epicor and was advised there is an option in Plant Cost config to ignore methods in roll up for purchased parts. OK with that. Except for the fact that the part set up in Vantage 6.1 was what is what dictated the cost method used, irrespective of any other items associated with the part.

Similarly, I am now finding that if you have a manufactured part marked in part set up for Average costing, and it has an approved BOM, the part set up again is ignored and the BOM cost is used. I am awaiting an Epicor response on this one, but if true, this means that if you manufacture parts and have BOMs the only cost method choice available is Standard. That defies logic.

Anyone have any feedback to share of similar experiences, advice, workarounds, or another magic check box? That would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!

Stan
3
Stan,

Last summer my CFO flirted with moving from Average to Standard cost, and we ran into the same issue (we're on 9.04.507A) of the cost rollup taking a manufactured cost instead of the purchase cost on any part with a BOM, regardless of the Part.Typecode setting.

My solution was to create a new Revision for each of the purchased parts that also had a BOM... using the DMT I would "unapproved" the actual revision, then "approve" the StdCost revision, run the standard cost rollup, "unapproved" the StdCost revision, and then "approve" the actual revision. Without the DMT that would be untenable, but with about 4000 affected parts the entire process took only a few hours over the course of a weekend.

Since we'd only need to do the rollup once a year it wouldn't be that much of a big deal. As it turned out, he didn't like how the standard costing got applied in other ways so we're still on average.

I can look back and see if I still have the notes with more detail if you'd like.

Ernie Lowell
Diba Industries

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "stanchmura" <schmura@...> wrote:
>
> I've just begun with Epicor 9.05.701 in Jan of '13 coming from Vantage 6.1 that I've had since 1999.
> I've encountered some differences in costing that caused quite a mess of our financial reporting.
> First, I have a family of parts marked as Purchased/Average cost. These also have a BOM for those rare times when a quick turnaround or low volume is needed. For that, we do an in-house make vs. the usual purchase. Unfortunately, when there is an approved BOM, the (much higher) cost from that is applied to all transactions on the part and the cost is rolled up to the parent.
> I contacted Epicor and was advised there is an option in Plant Cost config to ignore methods in roll up for purchased parts. OK with that. Except for the fact that the part set up in Vantage 6.1 was what is what dictated the cost method used, irrespective of any other items associated with the part.
>
> Similarly, I am now finding that if you have a manufactured part marked in part set up for Average costing, and it has an approved BOM, the part set up again is ignored and the BOM cost is used. I am awaiting an Epicor response on this one, but if true, this means that if you manufacture parts and have BOMs the only cost method choice available is Standard. That defies logic.
>
> Anyone have any feedback to share of similar experiences, advice, workarounds, or another magic check box? That would be greatly appreciated!
> Thanks!
>
> Stan
>