 |
|
Topic: Updates
|
| By: Guest | Posted on: Sep 27 2021 at 06:08:21 AM | Is there any news on updates?
Average costings, more items on reports (Build start & end dates / Project reference on GRN note etc).
Thanks | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Oct 7 2021 at 03:23:55 AM | | Anything? | |
| By: Maw | Posted on: Oct 8 2021 at 11:48:31 AM | Hello all,
I'm only a couple of hours into evaluating the MiniMRP package. I've built up a small Components data base, and a trial BOM. I now want to print off the BOM for distribution to a PCB line and for the life of me can't figure out how.
Thanks in advance | |
| By: Maw | Posted on: Oct 8 2021 at 11:57:34 AM | | Apologies for screwing up the existing thread. | |
| By: Maw | Posted on: Oct 8 2021 at 12:19:20 PM | | Never mind, found it. | |
| By: JSR | Posted on: Oct 12 2021 at 02:58:00 AM | Can we please get an update on this? It is a critical issue - you have added the feature to update part prices when goods are received (which is required) without ensuring that a mechanism exists to see the average value of stock - i.e. when using this feature you are increasing / decreases the value of stock on hand, which is wrong!
You advised you were looking at adding this in the summer, and then advised you had done it, but not yet added.
Please let us know what is planned.
Seems lots get added to the Todo list, but no plans real plan to implement these things, and no way to know if it's already been done, without keep asking.
Thanks | |
| By: JSR | Posted on: Oct 21 2021 at 02:43:17 AM | I am going to assume that this is not happening, real shame, we will have to look at other solutions, as this is a really important requirement.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Oct 25 2021 at 08:18:51 AM | | We turned the auto update feature off for this reason. We have to update manually, if we think it should be updated. Otherwise if we buy a small quantity of something at a high price, anything we had in stock when we set to the higher cost - and the other way round also. Moving avergae is best for us. | |
| By: Jason | Posted on: Oct 26 2021 at 07:59:26 AM | Rolling average is all well and good but I'd like to take it even further.
In the current version if I look at the cost of items in a BOM those costs have a direct relationship to what I see as the current item price. I can look at the item price in the detail tab and even look up the last PO if I want to and I can see where the price in the BOM comes from.
If the BOM showed an average then that average would not be the same as the last PO. Or any PO for that matter. I'd have to trust the system completely - or spend hours checking how the average cost has been calculated.
But I can see how average would help if I'm building something from materials that I have on hand then the rolling average, in other words the average cost of the items I'm going to use, would give me a more accurate build cost of the product I'm building.
But. Here's the "But". If I am quoting a customer for a future build then the historic cost of components, average or otherwise, is of no interest to me. In the past the cost of items may have been lower. If I quote a future build based on historic prices I could be quoting too low and make basically quote away any profit. (or quote too high and loss the contract)
For preparing quotes to customers I need to know what the cost of the components is going to be at the time I need them. Obviously there's no crystal ball to see future prices in any system. So. For quoting the most accurate is the build cost using the most recent purchase cost
So. If this average cost thing is implemented I'd still need a button to toggle it of when I'm preparing quotes. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Oct 27 2021 at 01:31:39 AM | I agree, i think as said before, we just need a BOM & stock valuation report that shows both standard and average, (in an ideal world, last price would be good)for each component and then obviously summed.
My main need is stock on hand average price - becuase of the issue when updating standard prices automatically. As stated above, this does not really have any use when it comes to costing a build for the future, but it is a guide.
As long as we can see the information, we can then make a decision what to do with it, at the moment it's just no available.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 8 2021 at 04:35:04 AM | Not sure if this about stock value, but we were hoping to see this.
We have a large amount of stock each month that has to be costed, at the moment it's not correct becuase it's not an average cost, just the standard cost, which keeps being updated.
An average cost of an assembly is helpful information also, but nothing more than that.
Is this still in the Todo list? | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 8 2021 at 08:35:56 PM | the work order table in the minimrp database has no build cost column in it, If it did averaging assembly costs would be easy because this would be the history where it can be averaged without touching values of the raw components But unfortunately its not there so all you have to go by within minimrp is the latest item costs from the last time the raw parts were purchased.
anyhow I still wouldn't trust it, check the last comment on this thread and further above it where mini mrp just fob it off saying its not a problem.
assembly build single item cost
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 11 2021 at 06:20:54 AM | I'd say the way user 'Jason' (see his post above) describes it is one of the problems they're dealing with. Everyone, including me, wants something different.
Another way of looking at is the word Stocj Valuation" (Not Stock Cost) is the stock valuation meant to be the VALUE or the COST. Value and Cost are not the same thing.
For example if you had a load of memory chips on the shelf that cost you a total of $100 and at the end of the month your accountant asks you the VALUE of your inventory. That value is not $100 if those same chips could now be purchased for $50.
If your inventory has lost value (because Items are not the same price as they were when you bought too many last year) then you have to accept that loss and tell the accountant that the value is $50 (not $100) and the accountant writes that loss down which reduces the profit which, in turn, reduces the tax.
I think mini mrp is trying to give you a VALUE not a cost.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 12 2021 at 02:14:52 AM | I think the developers should amke a comment!
This is getting complicated again - If the system can update the standard price of a part when it is received, then the stock valuation MUST have a column showing the average value (based on FIFO).
It's that simple.
It would be good to also see an avergae cost of an assembly, but not essential.
This subject just keeps going around - Support said "The math is done" - so just implement it. Make it really basic and see what people think.
But it is needed.
I agree everyone has a different idea - but at the moment we have nothing.
To the previous post - I think you have missed the problem. You don't know if you stock has lost value, becuase it may have been wrongly updated by a booking in update.
And - yes, that feature is also required. You ideally want to have your standard price update to get a true cost of sale.
Support please make a comment to either tell us it's happening or it's not! | |
| By: Support | Posted on: Nov 16 2021 at 07:54:12 AM | I'm sorry. I just don't know what to say (that hasn't been said already)
Just reading this page and it seems that everyone who posted here does want "something". But it seems you all want something different and some want more than others.
Can I draw your attention to the word "Mini" in the program name. It can not, and never will, contain all features of a fully loaded MRP system. I'm sure every single user of MiniMRP would like some additional features. But you can be sure they all want different things. If we added them all we would have a fully loaded MRP system and that is not what anyone wants.
I will add that some work is being done on costing/pricing but, Guest, I can can pretty much guarantee that it won't meet your requirements exactly.
| |
| By: SimonQ | Posted on: Nov 16 2021 at 08:53:34 AM | Yes there are lots of ideas above, but I think that there is consensus that everyone would like to see a rolling average cost price with valuation reports showing both Average cost and Latest cost (AKA what it is now).
The calculation whenever a part or assembly is booked in is not complicated, see the thread Inventory Valuation - Average Cost
It would be a lot easier to collate requests if people put their names to their posts rather than leaving the default as Guest. | |
| By: JSR | Posted on: Nov 17 2021 at 05:55:45 AM | I don't understand this either! Support said "The Math is done" - so it must have been something that was acknowledged was needed. The work being done may not meet everyones needs - but, surely something is better than nothing - it could be improved later if required.
I just can't see why the feature to update booked in prices exists without a method of averaging the stock valuation.
I think it's been made clear over an over that this is "Mini" MRP - but i don't understand why it is being held in that position??? It's a great product, and could be even better.
It just needs a few very basic additions. Those things that go on the "ToDo" list.
Perhaps i have wrongly assumed that there would be an aim to improve the product in line with ever changing demands on manufacturers etc. My personal opinion is that this product is great - it's light, it's simple, it is NOT tied to an accounts system and it does it's job.
I just wish, as said, that did not have to mean it could not get even better, and it should cost more for that! | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 17 2021 at 06:50:42 PM | | I think someone is missing the point here. I have looked at the cost of full blown MRPs and if you want to pay for those go ahead. As a small business Mini does what it needs to do for a reasonable cost. They have the right idea here. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 18 2021 at 01:54:09 AM | So no point in trying to make it any better then!
They already decided it was a good idea - they just did not answer if it was still going ahead - thats all this is about. | |
| By: Support | Posted on: Nov 22 2021 at 01:27:51 PM | Yes. Some work was done in that direction as a study, an experiment, a proof of concept. Or words to that effect.
But, if we're being pushed to make a decision right now, then we think this feature adds too much complexity to a Mini map and it will not be included.
We constantly develop new features to see how they work/look/feel. And then decide whether to release them. Or not. | |
| By: Support | Posted on: Nov 23 2021 at 04:18:37 AM | In answer to the comment above from guest "No point in trying to make it better then!"
We do continually work at making it better but without making it bigger. That means improve the features we already have. make them simpler and more intuitive to use.
So. I'm sorry. We really do have to resist the urge to confuse better with bigger. | |
| By: Disappointed | Posted on: Nov 23 2021 at 05:29:37 AM | Thank you. I think I originally asked the question regarding average costing (in this thread and previous about average costing). Support said it was being done, hopefully in an update during the summer.
I understand it is now NOT being done.
As I consider this a bug, IE you should be able to update costs from receipts, but NEVER without having an average costing method.
It’s a shame I wasted months waiting for this. I guess I am one of those who should pay a proper price for a proper product, that does contain the fundamental features required.
I think maybe Minimrp is a sideline project, because it really does not seem to operate like a software business.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Nov 24 2021 at 07:24:50 AM | I was also hoping for this - i was hoping for what support said previously:
This is already Work In Progress.
You'll be able to cost assemblies and total inventory value based on the average cost of your OnHand inventory.
There'll be two options, well, three options actually. #1 would be to use the standard, manually inputted, cost. #2 would be to use FIFO/Average and #3 would be to use most recent purchase price.
Sorry. Can't give any time scale on this. During the summer I hope.
Can't we just have an extra column in the stock valuation report with these averages? Or what you have already advised?
I do hope this will be given a second look. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 6 2021 at 02:58:06 AM | I have not understood this correctly - i assumed that the stock valuation was already based on the "Actual" price paid for the items left in stock, reading this, then checking again i can see it is just a simple, in stock times the standard price.
I agree with above, this is not right. Just looking at one part i am tens of pounds adrift if i run the built in stock valuation.
If MiniMrp can't do this, i think we at least need some reporting that shows the prices paid per item, against the standard price, so we can do our own calculations.
Generally, why not have some form of voting for these kind of features, then you would know who actaully thinks it's a good idea - surely that is what would determine if it's important, regardless of if that makes it bigger or better?
| |
| By: Matt1985 | Posted on: Dec 7 2021 at 05:11:03 AM | I've been using mini since v1. I'm happy as it is.
Any changes that are made should not change the way it works at the moment. The default should be that it continues to work exactly as it does now with maybe a button in setup that enables this extra stuff that not everyone wants.
In order to satisfy everybody there'd need to be a few columns for item costs and a few different columns for build cost as well as different totals in the inventory valuation reports. Not quite as simple as some people think I fear.
But lets say I vote to go along with this change.
When I create a PO I'd want the most recent real price to be pre-populated into a PO. There's no point in pre-populating the PO with some made-up average.
There needs to be some pop-up help that explains why the item cost in the item detail is not the same as the price on the PO.
When I show the build cost of a BOM I'd want two prices. One based on the average cost of the parts I have in my inventory and the other based on the most recent buy price because if I go out to buy more parts to build the assembly then my supplier doesn't case what the historic average was. The cost is the cost today.
In fact it's a bit more complicated than that. My build cost needs to be based on the average of materials I actually have in stock but also the cost of new parts that I need to buy because I often won't have enough in stock anyway.
When I show inventory valuation I'd want two totals. One based on average to show the actual cost of my stuff and the other based on the most recent cost because that is likely nearest to the true value of my stuff.
It's not so smple as saying we want average. It gets quite complex = price increase for the software as well as extra support explaining to the users who won't understand why the current price of an item is shown as, for example, $1.23 when not one single PO shows $1.23 as an actual purchase cost (because 1.23 is the calcutated average not an actual price of any item ever purchased.
Just talking about it makes me wonder if anyone really understands the complexity of making this work without increasing the price and, potentially, starting to charge for support. | |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 8 2021 at 02:01:14 AM | For me - i would be happy to pay for software / support to help me know the true cost of inventory i have in stock, in fact it's an accounting requirement.
I understand all the problems with this - so i just think the easiest thing to do, is just have the ability to update the cost from the last PO (Already done) - but then to have the stock valuation based on the price paid of the actual items in stock.
I also think the assembly cost is a bit pointless - becuase as we know, at the moment, the real cost will be what it is today - i.e. it must be checked, historical data means nothing.
This is such a shame, becuase support said it was being done, now back tracking on the basis of can't meet everyones requirements. But, it's almost there.
This topic should be locked now, becuase it all been discussed, if support are not going to do it, it just keeps going round and round.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 9 2021 at 06:54:11 AM | Reading back up this page I'd say that work on the costing was, and possibly still is, being done.
Look in the program setup where you can enable/disable the auto-update of prices based on last PO. See just below that there's a radio button that is permanently enabled. Developers only use those radio button when there's other options that can be selected. Only a guess but that the 'average cost' thing might well appear in a radio button below that.
| |
| By: Guest | Posted on: Dec 9 2021 at 07:04:37 AM | Yeah. That radio button does look like more options are coming below that.
But I'm not sure sure now. Look back up to the thread where support said:-
[Quote] But, if we're being pushed to make a decision right now, ...... etc etc.
I think this average cost thing is/was a grey area where they are/were working on it but without much conviction that it actually fitted in their mini mrp
To me it looks like the constant nagging on this thread forced them to make a decision right there and then and when something is gray the only decision that can be made is to shut it down. | |
| By: Dirk | Posted on: Dec 14 2021 at 10:22:01 PM | | Maybe!, all of us (user) wants to know what updated version is in the download area, which means a version number to see if we are up-to-date | |
Reply - add a comment to this topic.
You may enter letters, numbers and standard punctuation only. HTML and other scripts/tags will be rejected.
|
|
|
