Re: Override Terms code in COM

["Eric A. Wolf" <eric_a_wolf@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I hope they ask me "How hard" first...

Eric

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Olshavsky" <polshavsky@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "MAPICS ERP System Discussion" <mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: Override Terms code in COM


> Eric, The Mapics police are going to spank you.
> Seems to me there is a user exit that you can turn on and re-calc the due
date using the MBF9REP terms code instead of the Customer mstr terms code.
>
> Does not solve why it allows you to override but only for printing
purposes..
>
> Good Luck
> Pete Olshavsky
>
> "Eric A. Wolf" <eric_a_wolf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> No, standard AM applications. It just seems to me that they forgot that
> important piece and do not want to fess up...:)
>
> Eric
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Fox"
> To: "'MAPICS ERP System Discussion'"
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 10:51 AM
> Subject: RE: Override Terms code in COM
>
>
> > Hi Eric
> >
> > IFM involved?
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric A. Wolf [mailto:eric_a_wolf@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 12:53 PM
> > To: mapics
> > Subject: Override Terms code in COM
> >
> > To all,
> > Here is the scenario my customer has: When they offer a promotion, they
> > sometimes (as a part of the promo) give a 30 day extension to the
> customer's
> > terms. Here is the problem - when you override the terms from 30 days to
> 60
> > days, COM handles it like this:
> > 1) Changes the Terms code in the Open Order files
> > 2) When it gets shipped/invoiced, the printed Invoice states the
> new
> > terms description, the MBF9REP record has the new Net Due Days BUT
> > 3) The printed invoice only uses the Customer Master terms days to
> > calculate the Net Due Date which gets passed to AR.
> > 4) Now the Credit person sees from AR reports and Inquiries that
> the
> > invoice is past due when it really is not.
> >
> > MAPICS states "that is the way it has always been" and that I should
> either
> > use the Closings Before Current flag or key in the Invoice Date on the
> > Order.
> >
> > Does anyone else run into this "design flaw"? Why give us the ability of
> > overriding the Terms and not bother to use them except for printing the
> > description.
> >
> > TIA...
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > This is the MAPICS ERP System Discussion (MAPICS-L) mailing list
> > To post a message email: MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> > visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mapics-l
> > or email: MAPICS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> > at http://archive.midrange.com/mapics-l.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> This is the MAPICS ERP System Discussion (MAPICS-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mapics-l
> or email: MAPICS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/mapics-l.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster.
> _______________________________________________
> This is the MAPICS ERP System Discussion (MAPICS-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MAPICS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mapics-l
> or email: MAPICS-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/mapics-l.
>
>