Invdtl Material Cost

Oops! I forgot to divide the job costs by the job quantity before I compared them to the InvcDtl costs. I am getting accurate costs for configured units in InvcDtl. Sorry about the misinformation.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "kirstin.brandt" <kirstin.brandt@...> wrote:
>
> We have all our configured parts set to Last cost, Non-stock and Quantity bearing. The COS shown on the Invoice records in the WIP Reconciliation report is exactly the same as the Actual Costs in the job costing screen.
>
> I'm also seeing some strange costs in InvcDtl, but I don't see that they book to the G/L anywhere. Does anybody know if these are just reference costs (they also show $0 on credit memos generated from RMAs) or are actually booking somewhere?
>
> 8.03.405
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "roomurray" <rupert@> wrote:
> >
> > I've done some tests on this and although it does differ the actual COS of the part is still incorrect and this will be the case with all our configured parts. As all our configurators have a great deal of options within them the cost varies significantly between one job to the next and the way cos is being generated it will never give a representation of the true cost.
> >
> >
> > A truer cost of the product, I found, is in the jobasmble tables (shown in job tracker costs) - but its how to get these that is the problem.
> >
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Parfrey" <garyp@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > As per Marks comment you should always have your configurators set to
> > > average/actual. The invcdtl cost then will always reflect the job
> > > assembly 0 total cost proportionately to the job quantity being shipped.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > > Of roomurray
> > > Sent: 07 September 2009 13:42
> > > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [Vantage] Invdtl Material Cost
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We run a lot of products that have Large configurations wihtin them - I
> > > was looking at some of the material costs in Invdtl and although the
> > > Part has been configured the material costs reflects the full cost of
> > > the part (ie with all the parts that are not in the configured BOM)
> > >
> > > Has anyone come accross this before?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
We run a lot of products that have Large configurations wihtin them - I was looking at some of the material costs in Invdtl and although the Part has been configured the material costs reflects the full cost of the part (ie with all the parts that are not in the configured BOM)

Has anyone come accross this before?
Hello Rupert,

> We run a lot of products that have Large configurations
> wihtin them - I was looking at some of the material costs in
> Invdtl and although the Part has been configured the material
> costs reflects the full cost of the part (ie with all the
> parts that are not in the configured BOM)
>
> Has anyone come accross this before?

(You may not get a lot of responses today as it is Labo(u)r Day here in the
States.)

Do you have your Configurable Part set to Standard Cost? That will do it to
you.

Mark W.
Hi mark,

Yes all the configurable parts are std.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hello Rupert,
>
> > We run a lot of products that have Large configurations
> > wihtin them - I was looking at some of the material costs in
> > Invdtl and although the Part has been configured the material
> > costs reflects the full cost of the part (ie with all the
> > parts that are not in the configured BOM)
> >
> > Has anyone come accross this before?
>
> (You may not get a lot of responses today as it is Labo(u)r Day here in the
> States.)
>
> Do you have your Configurable Part set to Standard Cost? That will do it to
> you.
>
> Mark W.
>
Rupert



As per Marks comment you should always have your configurators set to
average/actual. The invcdtl cost then will always reflect the job
assembly 0 total cost proportionately to the job quantity being shipped.



Gary





From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of roomurray
Sent: 07 September 2009 13:42
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Invdtl Material Cost





We run a lot of products that have Large configurations wihtin them - I
was looking at some of the material costs in Invdtl and although the
Part has been configured the material costs reflects the full cost of
the part (ie with all the parts that are not in the configured BOM)

Has anyone come accross this before?





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I think inventory quantity has to be zero before you can change costing method. Since its your test db, try doing an inventory adjustment to zero, change the costing method, then another inventory adjustment to bring it back to its original quantity.




________________________________
From: roomurray <rupert@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 6:25:15 AM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Invdtl Material Cost

Â
OK..

Was about to test this in test db but costing methods are greyed out now.

Is it possible to retrospectively change the Cost method (Currently greyed out)
>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I've changed one of the parts in question in test and run with an avg costing - Still the same results. It still seems to be basing the material COS on the uncongigured part. o/h and labo(u)r looks fine though.

unfortunately the part in question is coming up as 5635 and we're selling at 41!!!

Within the Job tracker the material values there are correct.
>
I've done some tests on this and although it does differ the actual COS of the part is still incorrect and this will be the case with all our configured parts. As all our configurators have a great deal of options within them the cost varies significantly between one job to the next and the way cos is being generated it will never give a representation of the true cost.


A truer cost of the product, I found, is in the jobasmble tables (shown in job tracker costs) - but its how to get these that is the problem.


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Parfrey" <garyp@...> wrote:
>
> Rupert
>
>
>
> As per Marks comment you should always have your configurators set to
> average/actual. The invcdtl cost then will always reflect the job
> assembly 0 total cost proportionately to the job quantity being shipped.
>
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of roomurray
> Sent: 07 September 2009 13:42
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Invdtl Material Cost
>
>
>
>
>
> We run a lot of products that have Large configurations wihtin them - I
> was looking at some of the material costs in Invdtl and although the
> Part has been configured the material costs reflects the full cost of
> the part (ie with all the parts that are not in the configured BOM)
>
> Has anyone come accross this before?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
We have all our configured parts set to Last cost, Non-stock and Quantity bearing. The COS shown on the Invoice records in the WIP Reconciliation report is exactly the same as the Actual Costs in the job costing screen.

I'm also seeing some strange costs in InvcDtl, but I don't see that they book to the G/L anywhere. Does anybody know if these are just reference costs (they also show $0 on credit memos generated from RMAs) or are actually booking somewhere?

8.03.405

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "roomurray" <rupert@...> wrote:
>
> I've done some tests on this and although it does differ the actual COS of the part is still incorrect and this will be the case with all our configured parts. As all our configurators have a great deal of options within them the cost varies significantly between one job to the next and the way cos is being generated it will never give a representation of the true cost.
>
>
> A truer cost of the product, I found, is in the jobasmble tables (shown in job tracker costs) - but its how to get these that is the problem.
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Parfrey" <garyp@> wrote:
> >
> > Rupert
> >
> >
> >
> > As per Marks comment you should always have your configurators set to
> > average/actual. The invcdtl cost then will always reflect the job
> > assembly 0 total cost proportionately to the job quantity being shipped.
> >
> >
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of roomurray
> > Sent: 07 September 2009 13:42
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Vantage] Invdtl Material Cost
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > We run a lot of products that have Large configurations wihtin them - I
> > was looking at some of the material costs in Invdtl and although the
> > Part has been configured the material costs reflects the full cost of
> > the part (ie with all the parts that are not in the configured BOM)
> >
> > Has anyone come accross this before?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>