Re: COSTING PROBLEMS WITH USING PHANTOMS IN SUBASSEMBLIES

   Peggy

   To reiterate, and make sure we are talking the same 'issue'

   To solve the 'std cost' roll issue:  If made and sold, as aftermarket 'we
   need a rtn and cost' of the subassy.

   But if used in a sub-assy - the rtn exist in the parent part, therefore
   the sub - should have no rtn, or labor cost.

    

   You need to set up two part numbers---- I know Ugggg.   Maybe even a
   separate WH?? 

    

   This would also separate and allow you to control the aftermarket stocking
   pgm for those parts you need to be able to ship quickly, ie Reorder point,
   as opposed to  MRP , or other planning systems , they would plan for the
   'production' .. 

    

   good luck, hope this helps

    

   Jeff Snyder, CPIM

   Mapics Consultant

   From: DaleGindlesperger@xxxxxxxxxxx
   Reply-To: MAPICS ERP System Discussion <mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
   To: MAPICS ERP System Discussion <mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Subject: Re: COSTING PROBLEMS WITH USING PHANTOMS IN SUBASSEMBLIES
   Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:46:13 -0500
   Peggy,
   We have an extremely similar situation.  We set up phantom work centers to
   handle this.  Basically, if the subassembly/assembly shouldn't have the
   labor (or related) costs to be included, we assign it to be run across a
   workcenter with no rates (7P177, for example).  If you want the labor (or
   related) costs to be included, we run it across the "actual" workcenter
   that has rates (70177).
   We put times and such in both workcenters to facilitate scheduling and
   capacity.
   If Steve Hans is on this thread, he designed this solution for us in 1986,
   and we've been using it ever since.
   Dale Gindlesperger
   IT Manager/Special Projects Leader
   Fleetwood Folding Trailers, Inc.
   258 Beacon Street
   Somerset, PA  15501
                 "Shimko, Peggy"
                 <PShimko@automati
                 cproducts.com>                                            
   To
                 Sent by:                  <mapics-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
                 mapics-l-bounces@                                          cc
                 midrange.com
                                                                       Subject
                                           COSTING PROBLEMS WITH USING
                 11/11/2004 03:09          PHANTOMS IN SUBASSEMBLIES
                 PM
                 Please respond to
                 MAPICS ERP System
                    Discussion
                 <mapics-l@midrang
                      e.com>
   We are looking for a solution to our phantom subassembly costing
   problem.
   Currently we use phantoms defined as a subassembly in two separate
   scenarios:
   .
   1.                  As a repair part sold to customers.
   The phantom has a routing for contract (outside) services so the proper
   cost and appropriate selling price can be determined.
   2.                  As a subassembly that is immediately consumed by the
   next production operation.
   The phantom in Scenario #1 is a sub-assembly of a higher level
   component.  This higher level component has its own separate routing
   which includes the cost of ALL contract services needed to complete the
   higher level component. [This "all" cost includes the cost for
   assembling and incorporating the scenario #1 subassembly into the higher
   level component - the contractor quotes the higher level assembly costs
   separately - and, the contract cost for the higher level can be lower
   than the scenario #1 costs due to volume].
   The Phantom has the same part number in both scenarios.  For example:
   The cost of the Repair Part (Scenario #1) rolls up into the projected
   cost of the higher level component (Scenario #2).  Consequently, the
   higher level component production cost is overstated for inventory and
   inflates the cost of the higher level component.
   When the production job is purged for the Scenario #2 component, the
   cost relating to the contract costs of the Phantom Repair Part (Scenario
   #1) is not included in the Bill of Material (Scenario #2).  As a result,
   the Production Job close-out computes a favorable variance, increasing
   inventory value again.
   The Company does not want to change the item type from phantom to 1 or 2
   because that will increase the administrative effort required to plan
   and monitor inventory.
   Is there an alternative method of using phantoms that will provide
   accurate inventory values and production costs?
   We welcome all suggestions to assist us in resolving this problem.
   Peggy Shimko
   Gross Given Manufacturing Company
   Phone:  651-290-4362
   Fax:  651-224-3609
   E-Mail:  pshimko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   _______________________________________________
   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.