Announcement:
wanna exchange links? contact me at sapchatroom@gmail.com.
Posted by
Admin at
Reply from mikepope on Mar 28 at 11:34 AM I agree with the suggestion of a team discussion of the consequences of using split valuations. Sometimes people (team and user) just do not want to use it. So, you could consider a process change where you have a new item and a refub'd item (split valuation should be used but doesn't have to be). In this this scenario the user is encouraged to use the refur'd item, so it has zero cost. All costs are charged to to the last user account and equipment.
I realize saying things like this is SAP heresy but this suggestion may show that split valuation is not such a bad deal.
We can discuss this idea in more detail if you have an interest. Good luck on the solution.
Mike Pope
979-487-7061
email@removed
| | | ---------------Original Message---------------
From: ffolagundoye
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 10:09 AM
Subject: Same Article With Different Cost Price
Hello Mangesh,
I suggest you discuss with the team to clarify what consequences they are talking about. In my own experience, the only major change with split valuation is that you will have to specify the material (either c1,c2 or c3) when you want to do reservation, purchase requisition or goods issue. I believe that can be taken care of with proper change management.
Best regards,
Gbemi. |
| Reply to this email to post your response. __.____._ | In the Spotlight Become a blogger at Toolbox.com and share your expertise with the community. Start today.   _.____.__ |
