PO Suggestions Blank Title 66597

Yahoo Archive
1
Cathy,

I can do that and place a value on the PO Line, but what I need to do is put the value on the PO Release. So far I haven't found anywhere to capture the creation of the PO Release. The "PO.GetNewPORel" method never appears in a trace, and putting something on that method (like an info message) never fires, and a Data Directive on the PORel table never fires either.

Ernie Lowell
Diba Industries

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "cathyattechnologicsys" <cathy@...> wrote:
>
> You can use a BPM and enable one of the user defined Date fields in PO Suggestions.
>
> We use the BO POSugg.Generate to transfer some user defined data to the PO line.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Elizabeth" <gracefulthreads@> wrote:
> >
> > E9.04.507A SQL
> >
> > Is there a way to break into the Generate PO from PO Suggestions process? My purchasing guy wants to put a Promise Date on the New PO Suggestion screen and have that populate on the PO Release that gets created. I haven't tried going through the ttCallContextBPMData process yet, but nothing happens on the PORel Data Directive (I can't get anything to occur on an In-Transaction directive when the record is created via Generate).
> >
> > We're also upgrading to 9.05.702A in a couple of weeks, so if it works in 9.05, I can have him wait.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ernie Lowell
> > Diba Industries
> >
>
2
Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
Â
In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560 pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23, thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
Â
Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
Â
Thanks,
-Karl




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
3
I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.

The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard taking any action on the message.

If you can run net change during the day without impacting overall performance, it can only help.

You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance (as an example).

You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.

We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes are defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is really happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.

Rob Brown

--- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@...> wrote:

From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@...>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM






Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
Â
In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560 pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23, thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
Â
Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
Â
Thanks,
-Karl

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
Rob,

I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the
logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may really
help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO
releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ). Are
you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set this
manually...?

Thanks,

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that
would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little
chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.
>
> The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard
taking any action on the message.
>
> If you can run net change during the day without impacting overall
performance, it can only help.
>
> You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP
doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule
receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance (as
an example).
>
> You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly
set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly
excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.
>
> We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes are
defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is really
happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.
>
> Rob Brown
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@...> wrote:
>
> From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@...>
> Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen
quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
> Â
> In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last
one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560
pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the
Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from
now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then
bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last
job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday
and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone
the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the
suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left
intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last
job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as
a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23,
thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
> Â
> Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to
get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the
buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy
of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
> Â
> Thanks,
> -Karl
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
5
> You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly set,
> the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly excess - It is
> how you told the system to help you manage this part.

Rob is correct (as usual). If you use MRP to plan lot-for-lot, you're going
to get a message for every demand. Using modifiers will reduce the number of
messages/suggestions.

In addition to Min or Safety quantities, we've found that "Number of Days
Supply"[1] can take some of the nervousness out of MRP. This field tells MRP
to look ahead an X number of days and make a single suggestion out of it. It
is useful for parts ordered on a regular basis. If I buy from a vendor once
a week, have MRP look ahead for one manufacturing week and you'll get one
suggestion per part. (The Min/Safety/Lot Size modifiers are applied
afterwards.)

Mark W.

1. I've often thought this should be named "Number Days Demand"...
6
The seperation of Lock Qty and Lock Date into two individual check
boxes in 8.03.4xx is a real plus on the PO Release.

I anticipate a BPM or customization to always lock PO Release Qty
when we move to 4xx

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "nmtaylor1969" <n.taylor@...> wrote:
>
> Rob,
>
> I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the
> logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may
really
> help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO
> releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ).
Are
> you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set
this
> manually...?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that
> would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little
> chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.
> >
> > The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard
> taking any action on the message.
> >
> > If you can run net change during the day without impacting
overall
> performance, it can only help.
> >
> > You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP
> doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule
> receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance
(as
> an example).
> >
> > You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are
properly
> set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly
> excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.
> >
> > We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes
are
> defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is
really
> happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.
> >
> > Rob Brown
> >
> > --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@> wrote:
> >
> > From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@>
> > Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen
> quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
> > Â
> > In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last
> one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560
> pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but
the
> Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month
from
> now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then
> bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the
last
> job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday
> and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone
> the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND
the
> suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left
> intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last
> job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions
as
> a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-
23,
> thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
> > Â
> > Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day
to
> get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the
> buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy
> of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
> > Â
> > Thanks,
> > -Karl
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
7
I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is Lock Qty on the Release.

When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.

It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).

In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order faster.)

Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a 3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).

In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.

Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).

We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.

Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.

Rob Brown


--- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@...> wrote:
From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@...>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM











Rob,



I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the

logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may really

help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO

releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ). Are

you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set this

manually...?



Thanks,



Nick



--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>

wrote:

>

> I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that

would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little

chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.

>

> The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard

taking any action on the message.

>

> If you can run net change during the day without impacting overall

performance, it can only help.

>

> You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP

doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule

receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance (as

an example).

>

> You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly

set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly

excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.

>

> We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes are

defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is really

happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.

>

> Rob Brown

>

> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .> wrote:

>

> From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .>

> Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions

> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen

quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.

>

> In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last

one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560

pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the

Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from

now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then

bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last

job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday

and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone

the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the

suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left

intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last

job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as

a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23,

thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:

>

> Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to

get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the

buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy

of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?

>

> Thanks,

> -Karl

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>
8
I just saw Mark W's suggestion to explore 'days supply' and it is an excellent one.

I've used that on other systems with great benefit (way back in the late 80's).

So far, we haven't played with Vantage's flavor of it - but Mark's report of good results suggests it is worth a try.

(Thanks)

Rob

--- On Tue, 7/8/08, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 7:16 PM











I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is Lock Qty on the Release.



When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.



It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).



In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order faster.)



Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a 3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).



In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.



Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).



We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.



Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.



Rob Brown





--- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk> wrote:

From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk>

Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions

To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM



Rob,



I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the



logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may really



help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO



releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ). Are



you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set this



manually...?



Thanks,



Nick



--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>



wrote:



>



> I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that



would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little



chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.



>



> The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard



taking any action on the message.



>



> If you can run net change during the day without impacting overall



performance, it can only help.



>



> You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP



doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule



receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance (as



an example).



>



> You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly



set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly



excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.



>



> We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes are



defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is really



happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.



>



> Rob Brown



>



> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .> wrote:



>



> From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .>



> Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions



> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com



> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM



>



>



>



>



>



>



> Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen



quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.



>



> In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last



one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560



pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the



Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from



now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then



bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last



job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday



and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone



the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the



suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left



intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last



job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as



a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23,



thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:



>



> Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to



get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the



buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy



of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?



>



> Thanks,



> -Karl



>



> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



>

















































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9
I use days supply on 8,03 with the intended results.

Regards,

Andrew Best
Sent from a cell phone

-----Original Message-----
From: "Robert Brown" <robertb_versa@...>
To: "vantage@yahoogroups.com" <vantage@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 7/8/08 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions

I just saw Mark W's suggestion to explore 'days supply' and it is an excellent one.

I've used that on other systems with great benefit (way back in the late 80's).

So far, we haven't played with Vantage's flavor of it - but Mark's report of good results suggests it is worth a try.

(Thanks)

Rob

--- On Tue, 7/8/08, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 7:16 PM











I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is Lock Qty on the Release.



When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.



It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).



In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order faster.)



Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a 3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).



In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.



Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).



We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.



Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.



Rob Brown





--- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk> wrote:

From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk>

Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions

To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM



Rob,



I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the



logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may really



help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO



releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ). Are



you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set this



manually...?



Thanks,



Nick



--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>



wrote:



>



> I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that



would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little



chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.



>



> The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard



taking any action on the message.



>



> If you can run net change during the day without impacting overall



performance, it can only help.



>



> You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP



doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule



receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance (as



an example).



>



> You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are properly



set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly



excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.



>



> We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes are



defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is really



happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.



>



> Rob Brown



>



> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .> wrote:



>



> From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@.. .>



> Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions



> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com



> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM



>



>



>



>



>



>



> Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen



quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.



>



> In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last



one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560



pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but the



Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month from



now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then



bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the last



job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday



and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone



the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND the



suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left



intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last



job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions as



a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-23,



thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:



>



> Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day to



get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the



buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy



of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?



>



> Thanks,



> -Karl



>



> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



>

















































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
10
Thanks to everyone for the input...

I will be playing around with this today, so I will let you know how
we get on.

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
wrote:
>
> I just saw Mark W's suggestion to explore 'days supply' and it is
an excellent one.
>
> I've used that on other systems with great benefit (way back in the
late 80's).
>
> So far, we haven't played with Vantage's flavor of it - but Mark's
report of good results suggests it is worth a try.
>
> (Thanks)
>
> Rob
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
> From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 7:16 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen
available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is
Lock Qty on the Release.
>
>
>
> When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception
record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to
warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.
>
>
>
> It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can
also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set
at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date
mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).
>
>
>
> In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a
cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier
than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to
expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order
faster.)
>
>
>
> Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If
you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get
away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a
3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).
>
>
>
> In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy
order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as
they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.
>
>
>
> Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of
allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you
can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what
remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).
>
>
>
> We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and
we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.
>
>
>
> Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.
>
>
>
> Rob Brown
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics.
co.uk> wrote:
>
> From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk>
>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM
>
>
>
> Rob,
>
>
>
> I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the
>
>
>
> logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may
really
>
>
>
> help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO
>
>
>
> releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ).
Are
>
>
>
> you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set
this
>
>
>
> manually...?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that
>
>
>
> would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little
>
>
>
> chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard
>
>
>
> taking any action on the message.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > If you can run net change during the day without impacting
overall
>
>
>
> performance, it can only help.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP
>
>
>
> doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule
>
>
>
> receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance
(as
>
>
>
> an example).
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are
properly
>
>
>
> set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly
>
>
>
> excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes
are
>
>
>
> defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is
really
>
>
>
> happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Rob Brown
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .>
>
>
>
> > Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
>
>
>
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
>
>
> > Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen
>
>
>
> quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last
>
>
>
> one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560
>
>
>
> pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but
the
>
>
>
> Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month
from
>
>
>
> now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then
>
>
>
> bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the
last
>
>
>
> job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday
>
>
>
> and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone
>
>
>
> the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND
the
>
>
>
> suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left
>
>
>
> intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last
>
>
>
> job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions
as
>
>
>
> a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-
23,
>
>
>
> thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day
to
>
>
>
> get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the
>
>
>
> buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy
>
>
>
> of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Thanks,
>
>
>
> > -Karl
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
11
I think the PO release lock field will be of use to us, but it
appears that a full MRP regen must be run in order for this to take
effect. Net change doesn't seem to recognise the changed setting
within a PO. Would this be right...?

Thanks,

Nick


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
wrote:
>
> I just saw Mark W's suggestion to explore 'days supply' and it is
an excellent one.
>
> I've used that on other systems with great benefit (way back in the
late 80's).
>
> So far, we haven't played with Vantage's flavor of it - but Mark's
report of good results suggests it is worth a try.
>
> (Thanks)
>
> Rob
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
> From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...>
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 7:16 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen
available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is
Lock Qty on the Release.
>
>
>
> When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception
record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to
warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.
>
>
>
> It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can
also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set
at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date
mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).
>
>
>
> In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a
cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier
than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to
expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order
faster.)
>
>
>
> Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If
you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get
away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a
3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).
>
>
>
> In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy
order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as
they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.
>
>
>
> Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of
allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you
can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what
remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).
>
>
>
> We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and
we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.
>
>
>
> Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.
>
>
>
> Rob Brown
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics.
co.uk> wrote:
>
> From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield- electronics. co.uk>
>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM
>
>
>
> Rob,
>
>
>
> I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the
>
>
>
> logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may
really
>
>
>
> help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO
>
>
>
> releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ).
Are
>
>
>
> you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set
this
>
>
>
> manually...?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that
>
>
>
> would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little
>
>
>
> chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard
>
>
>
> taking any action on the message.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > If you can run net change during the day without impacting
overall
>
>
>
> performance, it can only help.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP
>
>
>
> doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule
>
>
>
> receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance
(as
>
>
>
> an example).
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are
properly
>
>
>
> set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly
>
>
>
> excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes
are
>
>
>
> defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is
really
>
>
>
> happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Rob Brown
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .>
>
>
>
> > Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
>
>
>
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
>
>
> > Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen
>
>
>
> quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last
>
>
>
> one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560
>
>
>
> pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but
the
>
>
>
> Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month
from
>
>
>
> now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then
>
>
>
> bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the
last
>
>
>
> job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday
>
>
>
> and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone
>
>
>
> the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND
the
>
>
>
> suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left
>
>
>
> intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last
>
>
>
> job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions
as
>
>
>
> a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-
23,
>
>
>
> thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day
to
>
>
>
> get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the
>
>
>
> buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy
>
>
>
> of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Thanks,
>
>
>
> > -Karl
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
12
Hmmm. I don't know.

We always do full nightly regens.

???

Rob Brown

--- On Wed, 7/9/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@...> wrote:

From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@...>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 2:18 PM






I think the PO release lock field will be of use to us, but it
appears that a full MRP regen must be run in order for this to take
effect. Net change doesn't seem to recognise the changed setting
within a PO. Would this be right...?

Thanks,

Nick

--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>
wrote:
>
> I just saw Mark W's suggestion to explore 'days supply' and it is
an excellent one.
>
> I've used that on other systems with great benefit (way back in the
late 80's).
>
> So far, we haven't played with Vantage's flavor of it - but Mark's
report of good results suggests it is worth a try.
>
> (Thanks)
>
> Rob
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...> wrote:
> From: Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 7:16 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm remote right now and don't have a PO screen
available in front of me - but yes: I believe the terminology used is
Lock Qty on the Release.
>
>
>
> When you check that box, MRP will never generate an exception
record (as part of Vantage's version of a planner exception table) to
warn the buyer to increase or decrease that release's qty.
>
>
>
> It WILL still give you move in/out (date) messages - but these can
also minimized by using reasonable days early/days late values (set
at the Part plant level to tell MRP to ignore a supply/demand date
mismatch less than the early/late values you set the part up for).
>
>
>
> In general, unless you are buying gold bars (or oil?!?!) it isn't a
cash flow crisises to have a receipt come in up to a week earlier
than MRP says it is 'really' needed. (It may actually allow you to
expedite remaining part shortages and ship/invoice a customer order
faster.)
>
>
>
> Late, on the other hand, should be experimented with carefully. If
you are carrying high Min or Safety on the part, you can probably get
away with allowing a scheduled receipt to go late equal to about a
3rd of the days your min/safety represent (by average daily usage).
>
>
>
> In contrast, if you carry no min/safety on a part and make/buy
order for order (JIT), no days late would be ever be acceptable as
they would disrupt your production & customer order fulfillment plan.
>
>
>
> Between locking PO release (and Job) qty's - and careful use of
allowable days early/late filter qty's at the partplant level, you
can cut down on your exception messages by up to 60% (and what
remains will be much more valid and actionable by your planners).
>
>
>
> We've customized both PO Entry and Job Entry to auto lock qty's and
we are just toying with (carefully!) days early/late filters.
>
>
>
> Sorry for running on... Hope the info helps.
>
>
>
> Rob Brown
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 7/8/08, nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield - electronics.
co.uk> wrote:
>
> From: nmtaylor1969 <n.taylor@kingfield - electronics. co.uk>
>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: PO Suggestions
>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 5:02 PM
>
>
>
> Rob,
>
>
>
> I am also have real trouble with this stuff... Can you explain the
>
>
>
> logic behind the locking of order quantities please. This may
really
>
>
>
> help me out as I am having trouble with MRP messing around with PO
>
>
>
> releases when I don't want it too ( just as you describe below ).
Are
>
>
>
> you referring to the lock field on the PO release...? Do you set
this
>
>
>
> manually...?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@ ...>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > I'm not sure I've ever met an experienced planner or buyer that
>
>
>
> would follow MRP suggestions blindly so I suspect there is little
>
>
>
> chance 'excess' would be brought in to the building in your example.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > The issue is time wasted even having to look at and then discard
>
>
>
> taking any action on the message.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > If you can run net change during the day without impacting
overall
>
>
>
> performance, it can only help.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should, however, consider Locking your on order qty's so MRP
>
>
>
> doesn't give you three messages to effectively split a schedule
>
>
>
> receipt and then accelerate a partial while delaying the balance
(as
>
>
>
> an example).
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > You should also look at your Mins/Safeties as, if they are
properly
>
>
>
> set, the pulled in qty suggestion in your example is not truly
>
>
>
> excess - It is how you told the system to help you manage this part.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > We have customized our time phase so the suggestions checkboxes
are
>
>
>
> defualted to unchecked (giving a much clearer view of what is
really
>
>
>
> happening). Our planner/buyers find that much more efficient.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Rob Brown
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > --- On Tue, 7/8/08, Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > From: Karl Dash <dashkarl@ .>
>
>
>
> > Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
>
>
>
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
>
>
>
> > Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 12:11 PM
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Yesterday I had a situation with a part that I think may happen
>
>
>
> quite often.. I am on Progress and v 803.403D.
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > In Time Phase a part had three jobs planned against it, the last
>
>
>
> one for 240 units on 9-23. There is a PO release active for 560
>
>
>
> pieces of the part that were scheduled for receipt yesterday, but
the
>
>
>
> Time-Phase suggested postponing it and bringing them in a month
from
>
>
>
> now and furthermore to reduce the quantity by 240 pieces and then
>
>
>
> bring the last 240 pieces in two months from now to satisfy the
last
>
>
>
> job mentioned above. Well, the 560 parts did get received yesterday
>
>
>
> and put in stock. The Time Phase removed the suggestion to postpone
>
>
>
> the receipt, the suggestion to bring them in one month later AND
the
>
>
>
> suggestion to reduce the quantity of the receipt by 240. That left
>
>
>
> intact ONLY the suggestion to bring in the 240 pieces for the last
>
>
>
> job in September. A buyer acting blindly with only PO suggestions
as
>
>
>
> a guide would contact the vendor to buy the 240 requirement for 9-
23,
>
>
>
> thereby generating excess. The alternatives are:
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Run net change Generate PO Suggestions regularly during the day
to
>
>
>
> get the best analysis of what needs to be bought and/or require the
>
>
>
> buyer to keep Time Phase open at all times to validate the accuracy
>
>
>
> of the suggestions. Thoughts, commentary?
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Thanks,
>
>
>
> > -Karl
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
13
Vantage 8.03.406

Looking to hear how others process P.O. Suggestions.

I have a process setup to run a 'Net Change' every 30 minutes. I DO NOT run a 'Regen'. What do others do... specifically, do you run a 'Regen' and if so, how often and what is the benefit?

Thanks.

Jeff
14
Why so frequently? (If I were a buyer/planner I'd be screaming bloody murder... It would be like planning in quick sand.)

Why not a nightly full regen and then let your materials, production control or purchasing manager determine when (if ever) during the day a net change would help them (instead of create chaos).

Rob



--- On Mon, 3/9/09, jplehr <jlehr@...> wrote:

From: jplehr <jlehr@...>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 8:13 AM






Vantage 8.03.406

Looking to hear how others process P.O. Suggestions.

I have a process setup to run a 'Net Change' every 30 minutes. I DO NOT run a 'Regen'. What do others do... specifically, do you run a 'Regen' and if so, how often and what is the benefit?

Thanks.

Jeff
15
We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100. If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has :).

Thanks,
Ken


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
16
Ken,

I sure hope 8.03.405 works and continues working the way you describe. From the purchasing departments point of view PO suggestions in earlier versions (we are on 8.03.305k) does not look at the supplier price lists (for price or effective dates). And we think it should.

In your example my suggestion would be to ............ create a price list "EVERY TIME" there is a new price. Yeh I know it is a few more transactions. However think of it this way. Special pricing is just that ..special. Out of the ordinary. We would not want the minority of transactions to control the majority. So if the PO suggestions does not look at the supplier price list then what good are price lists?

Putting that special price into a price list will also give you nice historical pricing reports for your purchasing folks to use to do their job.

I always had a problem with vantage were the pricing on a job for purchased material could over-ride or ignore the purchasing side of the system (price lists, etc.).

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
<mailto:matts@...>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions



We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100. If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has :).

Thanks,
Ken

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17
Thanks for the reply Matt.

Your suggestion confuses me just a bit. You're recommending that for a special price (meaning we've arranged on time pricing that is different from our price list), that we go and update the price list? I think maybe you misunderstood my original question:

Job 123 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.
Job 124 has part ABC that we negotiated @ $8 for one time pricing. They put this part on the job, adjust the price on the job mtl to $8, but when it shows up to purchasing it's reset to $10.
Job 125 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.

Your suggestion would disrupt Job 125 no?

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 4:59 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions



Ken,

I sure hope 8.03.405 works and continues working the way you describe. From the purchasing departments point of view PO suggestions in earlier versions (we are on 8.03.305k) does not look at the supplier price lists (for price or effective dates). And we think it should.

In your example my suggestion would be to ............ create a price list "EVERY TIME" there is a new price. Yeh I know it is a few more transactions. However think of it this way. Special pricing is just that ..special. Out of the ordinary. We would not want the minority of transactions to control the majority. So if the PO suggestions does not look at the supplier price list then what good are price lists?

Putting that special price into a price list will also give you nice historical pricing reports for your purchasing folks to use to do their job.

I always had a problem with vantage were the pricing on a job for purchased material could over-ride or ignore the purchasing side of the system (price lists, etc.).

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
<mailto:matts@...<mailto:matts%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions

We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100. If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has :).

Thanks,
Ken

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18
Ken,

When a situation as you describe occurs ( the part price can bounce all over the place). Why not have your purchasing folks do the negotiating, and po price amendment? Just leave the price off the job. Send them a note to change the price on the next purchase.

I am looking at the job tracker, under Job Details/materials/detail ....... I see there is a purchasing section at the bottom of that tab. There is a "comments" field can that field be edited? If so do those edited comments come over on the PO suggestion? If yes, this could be used to ALERT your purchasing staff of a special price for this order only.

The sub-contract detail tab allows you to put a price for the subcontract part. I believe this price over-rides price lists. But you did not mention anything about sub-contracting.

I can kind of see your point with the changes. Do these "special" prices happen a lot? If so what percentage of your jobs have "special" pricing for purchased parts?

We never "update" a price list price (unless we make a mistake). Instead we add a "new" price list. Doing this maintains the price history data. If you update an already existing price list you loose the history. One exception would be to change the expiration date of the price list (like moving it out or in) but never changing the price itself on the price list.

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
Modern Industries Inc.
814-455-8061
matts@...<mailto:matts@...>


________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 7:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions



Thanks for the reply Matt.

Your suggestion confuses me just a bit. You're recommending that for a special price (meaning we've arranged on time pricing that is different from our price list), that we go and update the price list? I think maybe you misunderstood my original question:

Job 123 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.
Job 124 has part ABC that we negotiated @ $8 for one time pricing. They put this part on the job, adjust the price on the job mtl to $8, but when it shows up to purchasing it's reset to $10.
Job 125 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.

Your suggestion would disrupt Job 125 no?

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 4:59 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Ken,

I sure hope 8.03.405 works and continues working the way you describe. From the purchasing departments point of view PO suggestions in earlier versions (we are on 8.03.305k) does not look at the supplier price lists (for price or effective dates). And we think it should.

In your example my suggestion would be to ............ create a price list "EVERY TIME" there is a new price. Yeh I know it is a few more transactions. However think of it this way. Special pricing is just that ..special. Out of the ordinary. We would not want the minority of transactions to control the majority. So if the PO suggestions does not look at the supplier price list then what good are price lists?

Putting that special price into a price list will also give you nice historical pricing reports for your purchasing folks to use to do their job.

I always had a problem with vantage were the pricing on a job for purchased material could over-ride or ignore the purchasing side of the system (price lists, etc.).

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
<mailto:matts@...<mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions

We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100. If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has :).

Thanks,
Ken

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
19
Long term purchasing will take more of a role in negotiations then they have in the past. Currently our engineers are doing a lot of this, the plan is to get them out of that role, but this will take a long time (we plan on hopefully having this out of engineers hands within 12 months).

In the mean time, we are doing exactly what you suggested...which is the engineers are putting a comment on the material line to alert purchasing to the negotiated pricings. I was hoping to have this done automatically as a part of the suggestions. I'm not sure why you can put a price on the job material just to have it overwritten before it gets to purchasing. I suppose some companies would prefer to always go by the price list.

I can't report on subcontract, we do very little subcontracting.

We also don't update price lists, but add new ones...as long as they're not special pricing. This special pricing probably happens less than 1% of the time...but when you're talking hundreds of items a day, it's still a dozen or so a week.

Thanks for the input Matt, I appreciate you taking the time to reply and always happy to get other points of view/suggestions.

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:17 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions



Ken,

When a situation as you describe occurs ( the part price can bounce all over the place). Why not have your purchasing folks do the negotiating, and po price amendment? Just leave the price off the job. Send them a note to change the price on the next purchase.

I am looking at the job tracker, under Job Details/materials/detail ....... I see there is a purchasing section at the bottom of that tab. There is a "comments" field can that field be edited? If so do those edited comments come over on the PO suggestion? If yes, this could be used to ALERT your purchasing staff of a special price for this order only.

The sub-contract detail tab allows you to put a price for the subcontract part. I believe this price over-rides price lists. But you did not mention anything about sub-contracting.

I can kind of see your point with the changes. Do these "special" prices happen a lot? If so what percentage of your jobs have "special" pricing for purchased parts?

We never "update" a price list price (unless we make a mistake). Instead we add a "new" price list. Doing this maintains the price history data. If you update an already existing price list you loose the history. One exception would be to change the expiration date of the price list (like moving it out or in) but never changing the price itself on the price list.

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
Modern Industries Inc.
814-455-8061
matts@...<mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts@...<mailto:matts%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 7:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Thanks for the reply Matt.

Your suggestion confuses me just a bit. You're recommending that for a special price (meaning we've arranged on time pricing that is different from our price list), that we go and update the price list? I think maybe you misunderstood my original question:

Job 123 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.
Job 124 has part ABC that we negotiated @ $8 for one time pricing. They put this part on the job, adjust the price on the job mtl to $8, but when it shows up to purchasing it's reset to $10.
Job 125 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is fine.

Your suggestion would disrupt Job 125 no?

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 4:59 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Ken,

I sure hope 8.03.405 works and continues working the way you describe. From the purchasing departments point of view PO suggestions in earlier versions (we are on 8.03.305k) does not look at the supplier price lists (for price or effective dates). And we think it should.

In your example my suggestion would be to ............ create a price list "EVERY TIME" there is a new price. Yeh I know it is a few more transactions. However think of it this way. Special pricing is just that ..special. Out of the ordinary. We would not want the minority of transactions to control the majority. So if the PO suggestions does not look at the supplier price list then what good are price lists?

Putting that special price into a price list will also give you nice historical pricing reports for your purchasing folks to use to do their job.

I always had a problem with vantage were the pricing on a job for purchased material could over-ride or ignore the purchasing side of the system (price lists, etc.).

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
<mailto:matts@...<mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions

We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100. If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has :).

Thanks,
Ken

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20
The part can be changed to a purchase direct part at the job level. PO
suggestions will then bring the cost of the part on the job into the PO.
This is useful for specially negotiated prices, but it will NOT consider
inventory when suggesting a PO.



Regards,





Andrew Best

Kice Industries, Inc.

P(316)744-7151

F(316)295-2412



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:43 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions





Long term purchasing will take more of a role in negotiations then they
have in the past. Currently our engineers are doing a lot of this, the
plan is to get them out of that role, but this will take a long time (we
plan on hopefully having this out of engineers hands within 12 months).

In the mean time, we are doing exactly what you suggested...which is the
engineers are putting a comment on the material line to alert purchasing
to the negotiated pricings. I was hoping to have this done automatically
as a part of the suggestions. I'm not sure why you can put a price on
the job material just to have it overwritten before it gets to
purchasing. I suppose some companies would prefer to always go by the
price list.

I can't report on subcontract, we do very little subcontracting.

We also don't update price lists, but add new ones...as long as they're
not special pricing. This special pricing probably happens less than 1%
of the time...but when you're talking hundreds of items a day, it's
still a dozen or so a week.

Thanks for the input Matt, I appreciate you taking the time to reply and
always happy to get other points of view/suggestions.

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 2:17 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Ken,

When a situation as you describe occurs ( the part price can bounce all
over the place). Why not have your purchasing folks do the negotiating,
and po price amendment? Just leave the price off the job. Send them a
note to change the price on the next purchase.

I am looking at the job tracker, under Job Details/materials/detail
....... I see there is a purchasing section at the bottom of that tab.
There is a "comments" field can that field be edited? If so do those
edited comments come over on the PO suggestion? If yes, this could be
used to ALERT your purchasing staff of a special price for this order
only.

The sub-contract detail tab allows you to put a price for the
subcontract part. I believe this price over-rides price lists. But you
did not mention anything about sub-contracting.

I can kind of see your point with the changes. Do these "special" prices
happen a lot? If so what percentage of your jobs have "special" pricing
for purchased parts?

We never "update" a price list price (unless we make a mistake). Instead
we add a "new" price list. Doing this maintains the price history data.
If you update an already existing price list you loose the history. One
exception would be to change the expiration date of the price list (like
moving it out or in) but never changing the price itself on the price
list.

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
Modern Industries Inc.
814-455-8061
matts@... <mailto:matts%40modernind.com>
<mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts@...
<mailto:matts%40modernind.com> <mailto:matts%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>]
On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 7:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Thanks for the reply Matt.

Your suggestion confuses me just a bit. You're recommending that for a
special price (meaning we've arranged on time pricing that is different
from our price list), that we go and update the price list? I think
maybe you misunderstood my original question:

Job 123 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this
part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is
fine.
Job 124 has part ABC that we negotiated @ $8 for one time pricing. They
put this part on the job, adjust the price on the job mtl to $8, but
when it shows up to purchasing it's reset to $10.
Job 125 has part ABC that we buy @ $10 from a price list. They put this
part on the job, it shows up to purchasing, we buy it for $10, all is
fine.

Your suggestion would disrupt Job 125 no?

Ken

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On
Behalf Of Sweny, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 4:59 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] RE: PO Suggestions

Ken,

I sure hope 8.03.405 works and continues working the way you describe.
From the purchasing departments point of view PO suggestions in earlier
versions (we are on 8.03.305k) does not look at the supplier price lists
(for price or effective dates). And we think it should.

In your example my suggestion would be to ............ create a price
list "EVERY TIME" there is a new price. Yeh I know it is a few more
transactions. However think of it this way. Special pricing is just that
..special. Out of the ordinary. We would not want the minority of
transactions to control the majority. So if the PO suggestions does not
look at the supplier price list then what good are price lists?

Putting that special price into a price list will also give you nice
historical pricing reports for your purchasing folks to use to do their
job.

I always had a problem with vantage were the pricing on a job for
purchased material could over-ride or ignore the purchasing side of the
system (price lists, etc.).

Matt Sweny
Purchasing Manager
<mailto:matts@... <mailto:matts%40modernind.com>
<mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matts%40modernind.com><mailto:matt
s%40modernind.com>>

________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mai
lto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mai
lto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Ken Williams
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com><mai
lto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] PO Suggestions

We're currently on 8.03.405. We have a problem where if someone adds a
non-stock item to a job and then puts special pricing in the job, it
gets reset when it comes through to PO Suggestions to the Last or
Supplier Price List.

That is, I add part ABC to a job that has a supplier price list of $100.
If I negotiate special terms on this part and change it to $80 in job
entry, when it comes through to suggestions it's back to $100.

I'm curious if this is what others exhibit, or if it's unique to .405. I
don't recall seeing this problem years ago when we were on an earlier
patch, and I'd really rather not wade through the dozens of patch notes
since then to find it's been fixed if someone on this list knows it has
:).

Thanks,
Ken

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

________________________________
This e-mail transmission and any attachments to it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, your use,
forwarding, printing, storing, disseminating, distribution, or
copying of this communication is prohibited. If you received
this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this message and delete it from your
computer.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]