PHANTOMs Pros and Cons

Yahoo Archive
1
All of our finished goods are made up of a series of Phantom bills.
These phantoms are like little building blocks that make it easy for
our engineers to create finished goods. We have not experienced any
issues with phantoms not exploding when our jobs are created.



Tom Morrison

Load Rite Trailers



________________________________

From: bnazmi38 [mailto:bahramn@...]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:26 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] PHANTOMs Pros and Cons



In process of preparation for launching Vantage 8.03 have a question
regarding Bill Of Materials structure. First time sage for our company.
Our BOMs are structured by using sub assemblies for the top level part
number (SKU). This is done mainly for the sake of being able to manage
them (i.e. creating new items daily and making changes).

Does anyone have good and bad experience setting up their BOMs in this
manner, as opposed to a flat BOM (no structure and just a parts list)?

I like to hear from people using structured BOMs (phantoms) and if any
reporting issues.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
In process of preparation for launching Vantage 8.03 have a question
regarding Bill Of Materials structure. First time sage for our company.
Our BOMs are structured by using sub assemblies for the top level part
number (SKU). This is done mainly for the sake of being able to manage
them (i.e. creating new items daily and making changes).

Does anyone have good and bad experience setting up their BOMs in this
manner, as opposed to a flat BOM (no structure and just a parts list)?

I like to hear from people using structured BOMs (phantoms) and if any
reporting issues.
3
An unidentified user wrote:
> In process of preparation for launching Vantage 8.03 have a question
> regarding Bill Of Materials structure. First time sage for our company.
> Our BOMs are structured by using sub assemblies for the top level part
> number (SKU). This is done mainly for the sake of being able to manage
> them (i.e. creating new items daily and making changes).
>
> Does anyone have good and bad experience setting up their BOMs in this
> manner, as opposed to a flat BOM (no structure and just a parts list)?
>
> I like to hear from people using structured BOMs (phantoms) and if any
> reporting issues.

Our bills were structured just like yours for the very same reason. We're not
sure if it's a bug in Vantage or by design but we ran into one very big issue.

The first time to add a "mini-bill" with phantom parts on it, everything works
as expected. However, if there is already a bill of operation or a bill of
material item on the bill or work order (append mode) when you do a Get
Details the phantom parts are NOT blown throw. We discovered this VERY late in
our implantation and it plagued our launch.

We are moving ahead with the product configurator and are trying to flatten
out the bills somewhat but we are finding that there is still some use for the
use of bills with phantom parts - just not for options.

Mark W.