Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question

> We did consider using a generic part number, but the ability track
> serial numbers to the original sales order/job led us down a different
> path (using the true part number).

Oddly enough, the decision to use the generic part number was driven by out
serial number requirement. When a part comes back in for repairs and you ship
it out on a new (repair) sales order, it seems you lose the original sales
order number when you look up the sales order number at Serial Number Tracker
- at least that was true in .30X but I think it's still true. The Serial
Number Tracker seems to hold the last sales order the serial number was on.

We didn't like the fact that two different part numbers could have the same
serial number but this turned out to work in our favor.

Mark W.
Our company is in the process of implementing Vantage 8.03.404B.

When we were sitting through the sales pitch, we inquired about the
method for dealing with customer returns for repair, either warranty
or non-warranty. We were told that we did not need the field service
module and that the RMA capabilities in Vantage would suffice.

Now that we own the software, we can't seem to find anyone that can
make the RMA tools work for us.

We are a standard cost, build-to and ship-from stock company. We do
use mrp.

The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want
them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference
room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though
we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost
adjustment hit at standard.

Does anyone use the RMA tools in a similar environment? Or do we
need the field service module?

I thank you in advance for any advice or wisdom the group could pass
on to us.

Mark L. Knight, CPIM
Master Scheduler
Picometrix, LLC
Ann Arbor, Mi
The best way to handle this would be to use the field service module.
That's how we used to handle it until just recently. The only issue
with Field Service is that it is a slightly cumbersome process. That's
why we stopped using it.



Now what we do is create the RMA then add a note to it when it comes in
and just close the line...because we too don't want to show it in our
inventory.



Hope that helps.



Michelle de la Vega

Business Applications Manager

Cold Jet, LLC
455 Wards Corner Road
Loveland, Ohio 45140
513-716-6400 (direct)

513-382-3281 (cell)
513-831-1209 (fax)

www.coldjet.com


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Knight
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 3:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question



Our company is in the process of implementing Vantage 8.03.404B.

When we were sitting through the sales pitch, we inquired about the
method for dealing with customer returns for repair, either warranty
or non-warranty. We were told that we did not need the field service
module and that the RMA capabilities in Vantage would suffice.

Now that we own the software, we can't seem to find anyone that can
make the RMA tools work for us.

We are a standard cost, build-to and ship-from stock company. We do
use mrp.

The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want
them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference
room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though
we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost
adjustment hit at standard.

Does anyone use the RMA tools in a similar environment? Or do we
need the field service module?

I thank you in advance for any advice or wisdom the group could pass
on to us.

Mark L. Knight, CPIM
Master Scheduler
Picometrix, LLC
Ann Arbor, Mi





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We are soon going live on 403A. We are very similar to you in all cases except we assemble to order for 98% of our sales. Our Stocked parts are simply to support our 1-7 day order fulfillment assemble to order model.

(Also without Field Service) our RMA for repair process is to receive the parts for repair from the customer via the RMA into the inspection queue.

Upon receipt and verification of professed condition, we enter a sales order (referencing the RMA) for a non-stock Make-Direct part "REPAIRS" (as we are essentially 'selling' a repair service for either $0.00 as a warranty repair or some minimal good will cost+ charge).

Order Job Wizard creates a job with no details. Our Production control department reads RMA & Sales order memo info to determine what assembly line should process the REPAIR. They then add an OpDtl to process the job in the appropriate assembly resource group, engineer, schedule, print the traveler and release the Job.

The Traveler acts as the message for the inspection to disposition the assembly to be repaired directly to the job.

The Job is then processed normally (like the 150-200 other jobs per day we process) in assembly & shipping where it is shipped and invoiced.

We recognize that we will also take a short term GL hit on the returned for repair material - but it will be rapidly offset by consumption of that material into WIP and ultimately be releived upon shipping/invoice.

I suspect we will end up further tweaking the process to insure everything hits the correct asset, sales & variance accounts but, once done, it will be a 'net zero' $ impact as our goal is to support our customers (and not profit excessively, if at all, on repairs).

If your company model/policies are such that you just can't accept faux 'cost ownership' of the customers' return for repair materials (for even a short time), Field Service will like be required for you.

I suspect however that Field Service truly is just that, and may not elegantly (if at all) provide for the integrated processes needed to get the customers' material back into your building (while still under their financial ownership).

I would INSIST Epicor 100% model the process for you (onsite with your data - not a slick scripted sales presentation) to assure yourself Field Service won't create more process problems than it resolves.

Hope that helps.

Rob Brown

--- On Tue, 4/22/08, Mark Knight <mknight@...> wrote:

From: Mark Knight <mknight@...>
Subject: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 3:06 PM






Our company is in the process of implementing Vantage 8.03.404B.

When we were sitting through the sales pitch, we inquired about the
method for dealing with customer returns for repair, either warranty
or non-warranty. We were told that we did not need the field service
module and that the RMA capabilities in Vantage would suffice.

Now that we own the software, we can't seem to find anyone that can
make the RMA tools work for us.

We are a standard cost, build-to and ship-from stock company. We do
use mrp.

The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want
them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference
room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though
we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost
adjustment hit at standard.

Does anyone use the RMA tools in a similar environment? Or do we
need the field service module?

I thank you in advance for any advice or wisdom the group could pass
on to us.

Mark L. Knight, CPIM
Master Scheduler
Picometrix, LLC
Ann Arbor, Mi
















____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Hi Mark,

> The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want
> them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference
> room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though
> we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost
> adjustment hit at standard.

This is what we do: We created a non-stock part number called "RMA" and this
part has no standard cost. Once we know that we're doing some work on the
customer's part, we make sure that the Product Group is set to a Repair
version (Standard Line Repair, Standard Line Warranty, etc.) This product
group has the COGS account set to Repair expense or Warranty Expense.

We open a Job and dispose the zero-cost part to it. We also to make sure to
set the Part Description to something useful! The job collects all costs that
goes into the Job (any material or labor). When the job is complete, the whole
amount is considered COGS (because it's a non-stock part) charges all costs to
the correct expense accounts.

Food for thought.

Mark W.
Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the
received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your
usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset valuation.


Kersten MacLennan
IT/ERP Analyst
Semrock, Inc.
3625 Buffalo Rd.,
Suite 6
Rochester, NY 14624
585-594-7009
585-594-7095 fax

kmaclennan@...

The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation


Hundreds of Thousands of Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered -
extensive inventory now!

The information contained in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you
received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete
it. Thank you




________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:29 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question



Hi Mark,

> The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want
> them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference
> room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though
> we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost
> adjustment hit at standard.

This is what we do: We created a non-stock part number called "RMA" and
this
part has no standard cost. Once we know that we're doing some work on
the
customer's part, we make sure that the Product Group is set to a Repair
version (Standard Line Repair, Standard Line Warranty, etc.) This
product
group has the COGS account set to Repair expense or Warranty Expense.

We open a Job and dispose the zero-cost part to it. We also to make sure
to
set the Part Description to something useful! The job collects all costs
that
goes into the Job (any material or labor). When the job is complete, the
whole
amount is considered COGS (because it's a non-stock part) charges all
costs to
the correct expense accounts.

Food for thought.

Mark W.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the
> received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your
> usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset valuation.

Non-nettable means it's not available material to MRP, it WILL still carry any
associated costs.

Mark W.
It will carry costs, but not to your inventory...



M. Manasa Reddy
manasa@...
P: 630-806-2000
F: 630-806-2001


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Mark Wonsil
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:14 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question



> Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the
> received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your
> usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset
valuation.

Non-nettable means it's not available material to MRP, it WILL still
carry any
associated costs.

Mark W.






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

We are hoping that suffices as that is our plan.

However, Mark W.'s process of bringing the RMA material in as a $0.00 std cost generic p/n (and I'm assuming the 'real' returned part is referred to accurately somewhere in the RMA as a text memo or perhaps even in a UD field) is very compelling as it won't create cost variances once issued to a Job for repair/refurb.

A "real" part (with a non-zero std cost) would (I think) create a job cost variance.

I think it all comes down to the comfort level of your controller (and auditors).

I suppose there are potential asset ownership issues as well but the legalities of who actually 'owns' RMA returned parts for repair shouldn't be an overriding issue as, in the end, clear contractual terms to cover that can be imbedded in the RMA printed form.

Rob Brown

--- On Tue, 4/22/08, Kersten MacLennan <kmaclennan@...> wrote:
From: Kersten MacLennan <kmaclennan@...>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 4:59 PM











Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the

received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your

usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset valuation.





Kersten MacLennan

IT/ERP Analyst

Semrock, Inc.

3625 Buffalo Rd.,

Suite 6

Rochester, NY 14624



fax



kmaclennan@semrock. com



The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation



Hundreds of Thousands of Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered -

extensive inventory now!



The information contained in this message and any attachments may be

privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader

of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible

for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby

notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this

communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you

received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete

it. Thank you



____________ _________ _________ __



From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On Behalf

Of Mark Wonsil

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:29 PM

To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question



Hi Mark,



> The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want

> them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference

> room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though

> we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost

> adjustment hit at standard.



This is what we do: We created a non-stock part number called "RMA" and

this

part has no standard cost. Once we know that we're doing some work on

the

customer's part, we make sure that the Product Group is set to a Repair

version (Standard Line Repair, Standard Line Warranty, etc.) This

product

group has the COGS account set to Repair expense or Warranty Expense.



We open a Job and dispose the zero-cost part to it. We also to make sure

to

set the Part Description to something useful! The job collects all costs

that

goes into the Job (any material or labor). When the job is complete, the

whole

amount is considered COGS (because it's a non-stock part) charges all

costs to

the correct expense accounts.



Food for thought.



Mark W.



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



























____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
True Mark, but is there not a way to funnel those RMA received asset costs to a distinct G/L account?

I must confess, I've been so pre-occupied for months just trying to get Vantage to behave appropriately to meet our process needs (prior to going live in about 7 weeks), I'm just now allowing myself the time to try to fully understand the cost impact of things (and what might need to be adjusted in our process or via customizations to make the resulting financial data a tool for progress instead of an obstacle as on our legacy system).

Any tips are greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Rob Brown



--- On Tue, 4/22/08, Mark Wonsil <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
From: Mark Wonsil
<mark_wonsil@...>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 5:13 PM











> Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the

> received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your

> usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset valuation.



Non-nettable means it's not available material to MRP, it WILL still carry any

associated costs.



Mark W.



























Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.



____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
We did consider using a generic part number, but the ability track
serial numbers to the original sales order/job led us down a different
path (using the true part number).



That's when we noticed the dollars piling up in the variance account.



I really appreciate all the feedback so far. It is driving a lively
discussion here at the office.



Mark K.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:44 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question



Kersten,

We are hoping that suffices as that is our plan.

However, Mark W.'s process of bringing the RMA material in as a $0.00
std cost generic p/n (and I'm assuming the 'real' returned part is
referred to accurately somewhere in the RMA as a text memo or perhaps
even in a UD field) is very compelling as it won't create cost variances
once issued to a Job for repair/refurb.

A "real" part (with a non-zero std cost) would (I think) create a job
cost variance.

I think it all comes down to the comfort level of your controller (and
auditors).

I suppose there are potential asset ownership issues as well but the
legalities of who actually 'owns' RMA returned parts for repair
shouldn't be an overriding issue as, in the end, clear contractual terms
to cover that can be imbedded in the RMA printed form.

Rob Brown

--- On Tue, 4/22/08, Kersten MacLennan <kmaclennan@...
<mailto:kmaclennan%40semrock.com> > wrote:
From: Kersten MacLennan <kmaclennan@...
<mailto:kmaclennan%40semrock.com> >
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 4:59 PM

Can't you just set up a non-nettable location and make sure that the

received parts go to that location? This way it doesn't show in your

usable inventory and the value is not included in your asset valuation.

Kersten MacLennan

IT/ERP Analyst

Semrock, Inc.

3625 Buffalo Rd.,

Suite 6

Rochester, NY 14624

fax

kmaclennan@semrock. com

The Standard in Optical Filters for Biotech & Analytical Instrumentation

Hundreds of Thousands of Ion Beam Sputtered filters delivered -

extensive inventory now!

The information contained in this message and any attachments may be

privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader

of this message is not the intended recipient, or any agent responsible

for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby

notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this

communication may be unlawful and therefore strictly prohibited. If you

received this message in error, please reply to the message and delete

it. Thank you

____________ _________ _________ __

From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On
Behalf

Of Mark Wonsil

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:29 PM

To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

Subject: RE: [Vantage] Vantage 8.03.404B RMA Question

Hi Mark,

> The units coming back are owned by the customer, so we do not want

> them to show in our inventory dollars. During our first conference

> room pilot, we did bring back a unit with the RMA tools. Even though

> we tried to return it to inventory with zero dollars, we took a cost

> adjustment hit at standard.

This is what we do: We created a non-stock part number called "RMA" and

this

part has no standard cost. Once we know that we're doing some work on

the

customer's part, we make sure that the Product Group is set to a Repair

version (Standard Line Repair, Standard Line Warranty, etc.) This

product

group has the COGS account set to Repair expense or Warranty Expense.

We open a Job and dispose the zero-cost part to it. We also to make sure

to

set the Part Description to something useful! The job collects all costs

that

goes into the Job (any material or labor). When the job is complete, the

whole

amount is considered COGS (because it's a non-stock part) charges all

costs to

the correct expense accounts.

Food for thought.

Mark W.

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











__________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ





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