Hi. We are batteling with this issue. Are there any kind of solution for this?Kind regardsBrian
Have tried it a couple of times, without luck. Are there any delay in the update of this?
Hi all, We have been investigating Sales and Operations Planning in IFS. We are on Apps 10 Update 13 and are looking for any customers who are using the functionality. We have viewed the webcast and have talked to a consultant on its use but it would be helpful to talk to a customer who is actually using it. Thanks, Nina McSweeney Hi Nina Have you managed to move on with this module?Regards Brian Sandfeld
Hi Nina, Perhaps you can contact @Richard Owen (an IFS Consultant from IFS UK). He is working with a company currently implementing IFS S&OP together with RRP. Maybe he can arrange some meeting with you and this customer. Best Regards, Mats at IFS R&D Thanks a lot for the reply. We will get in touch with him when our customer is ready to move on.Regards Brian
Which posting controls are you attempting to impact? M103 Regards Brian
Have you verified the posting controls (yours may not look exactly like this but should have the control type for preposting). What I am intending to use is M103 with control type C58 Mandatory Preposting. However, there is no Pop up box coming in Aurena, but it is working in the IEE client.
Just discovered, that is possible to press “New” and apply a tax code, even the “Apply Tax” is not selected. This allows us to add a calculated tax code.Problem solved.
Has anyone been able to set up the intersite profitability between 2 companies? The documentation only mentions this is available between 2 sites within the same company but we have a need to use this across companies. I’ve set up both companies to allow intersite profitability but the posting controls are not triggering. We are using 21R2. Hi Have managed to find a solution to this issue?Regards Brian
Hello all - I work with a manufacturing business that operates multiple legal entities and sites. To complete an order, sub-assemblies are created in India, then those sub-assemblies are transferred to a US site for final assembly and configuration before sale to the customer. We need to be able to measure our labor / OH / raw materials expense associated with each sale to measure profitability, but when the sub-assembly is transferred from the India site to the US site, it is recorded as a material purchase and we lose visibility into the composition of that cost (labor / OH / raw material / intercompany profit on transfer). Is there a way to properly configure this in IFS to maintain visibility into underlying cost on intercompany transfers? It can be done in Oracle and SAP… Any help is greatly appreciated, Jeff Hi JeffHave you managed to find a solution to this issue? Regards Brian
Hi, In a multi company example, I have used traditional IFS functionality as this would be a buy sell type arrangement. The key to making the process work is to use the costing functionality to perform the ICM (Intercompany mark up) and have that as part of the inventory value. You can optionally use what I would call the supplier specific delivery overhead. In doing this when you buy parts from supplier X (company 1) you then report an ICM (10% for example) on those transactions. This is part of the inventory value and can be booked to a different account. That value is then released at COGS or part usage. Similarly on the sales side, you would make sure the ICM value would also flow to a different account. Best regards. HiIn our example the selling company have there cost buckets on the inventory parts split in a number of different Cost Buckets (200 Labour, 300 Machine …..) . The buying company will receive the parts with one Cost Bucket (110 or 140), being the full co
Hi, This is a defect if it doesn’t work in Aurena APP10. It is corrected in IFS Cloud in: 21R2 SU10 22R1 SU4 22R2 EA 23R1 EA Best regards, Linda Hi LindaThanks for answering. Are there a bug fix on the way for this? The customer has chosen to use IFS Aurena and is not going to IFS Cloud in the near future. What to do?Regards Brian
Hi LindaAll the informations are here and it looks to be an obvious bug?What are the time forecast for having this changed? RegardsBrian
Hi, On the receiving company, you would have a cost bucket for the ICM, intercompany mark up. That bucket would use the delivery overhead concept. That delivery overhead could be just a standard rate or a rate used only for that supplier. In part cost details area of IFS, you need to establish posting cost groups, then connect the posting cost groups to the buckets. Then posting control you would drive the account based on the posting cost group. This would be control type C90 or C91 (but use the posting cost group control type. Do this in TEST as you can do harm (many posting errors), if not set up correctly. Best regards Thanks for the answer. So it is not possible to devide the stock value in the receiving company by the actual value from the sending company and the mark up? Best Regards
HiThanks for your answer.There is no conflicts in the codestring completion itself. The background for the issue is, that a code string completion is put on each person ( Code H) in regards to post on a specific department (Code B). However, in some cases, the client will like to change this manually and overrule the Code string completion. However, it seems impossible, even the help text tells it to be possible. I looks to be a bug or a mismatch between what is written and what is possible. Are there any work around to this?RegardsBrian
Hi.No, we have not found a proper solution yet. We have set up an event, sending emails when changes are made, but it is not a fantastic and valid solution. We will look in to the Documentation Approval process functionality, but it looks to be a complicated setup. IFS should look in to this problem, as it is a general requirement, to have an approval process. Brian
Hi NeillThanks for you reply.I hope IFS will make a standard solution for this, as it is a normal requirement in most companies?I do not fully understand you suggestion concerning the custom event?The “Blocked for use” flag can be manually changed. So, your suggestion is that the first user doesn't have permissions to change the “Blocked for use” bottom?Only the second user have this right? If so, It is not a fantastic solution, as most companies just want to ensure that at least two people have approved the change! Have you got other ideas?Regards Brian
Hi ErandaThanks for your reply. It sounds like a usable solution. However, there is quit some specification and setup to do, for it to work. Can you help us by sharing some more details of the events and solution you made? Regards Brian
Hi SamuelBelow is the (Supplier) Payment Addresses page in IEE, where all the attachments are available. Here is the exact same page in IFS Aurena, but attachments are not visible: We have promised a customer the functionality of approval routing and they run IFS Aurena!We need this to work.. RegardsBrian
Hi SamuelI know this functionality and that is why it is actually visible in the IEE client. Normally this will enable the functionality in Aurena as well.However, in this specific case of Payment Addresses, it is only visible in IEE, but not in Aurena as fare as I can see.What to do? I really don’t want to go back to the customer to tell them of yet another bug in Aurena.RegardsBrian
Hi.It worked for me now and the attachment is now also visible in Aurena. It must be the Refresh Cach that made the difference in Aurena, even it was visible in IEE. Thanks a lot. It is a big help Regards Brian
@KRTI No, we did not find a solution. @Ralph Gericke It has nothing to do with the Name. It is a simple verification of the number and a documentation for the number to be valid.
@Ralph Gericke The simple question I mentioned is a belowIFS is able to do the validation in the VIES database, but does not store the Validation ID for documentation purpose. Have anybody found a solution for this and does IFS obtain a validation ID when requesting in the VIES database?The explanations you mentions, does not answer the question or help in any way. What I need IFS to store is the request number. :
Thanks for your answer. It is Apps10 Upd 2. We will get around the problem by splitting the payment in two. However, we might use your trick if we have more lines to handle. Regards Brian
Hi DJPDid you find a solution for your issue? We are sitting with the same problem and need a solution as soon as possible? Regards Brian
Hi Everyone, Did you find a solution for your issue? We are sitting with the same problem in IFS Cloud. Thanks in advance for your feedbacks. Regards, Virginie No, haven't found any solution. I am told IFS’ s does have a patch to solve it, but i am not sure.Maybe somebody from IFS can advice? Brian
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
