Am Donnerstag, 30. April 2015 11:30:03 UTC+2 schrieb Cédric Krier: > > On 30 Apr 02:12, Axel Braun wrote: > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, 29. April 2015 17:40:03 UTC+2 schrieb Cédric Krier: > > > > > > On 29 Apr 08:22, Axel Braun wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Mittwoch, 29. April 2015 15:10:03 UTC+2 schrieb Cédric Krier: > > > > > > > > > > > > I also needed to implement a way to re-compute the cost price > of a > > > > > > > product: https://bugs.tryton.org/issue4729 > > > > > > > The current implementation is quite naive as it re-compute > from > > > the > > > > > > > first move. We will see if we need to improve this computation > and > > > if > > > > > so > > > > > > > I already put some idea on the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I dont think that a recompute is required. Common practice is > (as > > > > > described > > > > > > before): > > > > > > -- > > > > > > I think you need to consider for which quantity of material the > > > > > subsequent > > > > > > charge applies: > > > > > > If the quantity is still on stock, fine, you can recalculate > > > > > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > How can you know that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > By checking the stock quantity? > > > > > > This doesn't tell me if the actual products are still in the > warehouse. > > > > > > > Now I dont understand. Tryton tells you your stock situation, so when > you > > are having to do what you call a recaluclation, you can check the stock > > situation, and it gives you the quantities. Unless you are > batch-managed, > > it's a dont -care on the product level. Just the quantity is of > interest. > > I think you don't correctly understand what is the "average" cost > method. Because the timing of event is very important. > It is wrong to add the landed cost to the average cost of a product if > the *real* product on which this landed cost applies is no more in the > warehouse (and we don't care about just the quantity but the *exact* > product). >
What is the 'real product'? As explained, as long as you are not working with batches it is irrelevant if the product for which the subsequent charge applies is in the warehouse, as long as the overall quantity is OK. Thinking about it, even with batches it is irrelevant, as the valuation level is probably on material, not on batch level. > > Example: > > - I buy 10 products @ 10€ > - I buy 10 products @ 12€ > - current average cost: 11€ > - I sale 10 products > - current average cost: 11€ > - I book landed cost for the first purchase: 1€ > - current average cost: 11.5€ (not 12€) > Wrong. You just have 10 in stock, not 20. Additionally, in your calculation you would have to cancel the posting for the sale @ 11€ and recreate it with the new moving average price. I bet no accountant will testify this.... > - I book landed cost for the second purchase: 2€ > - current average cost: 12.5€ (not 14€) > > > > > > > If not, only the amount that relates to the stock is charged to > the > > > > > stock, > > > > > > the rest goes to the price difference account. > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand. <http://www.b2ck.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > I try an example: > > > > You have a stock of 100 pieces @ 1,20 EUR = 120 EUR stock value > > > > > > > > Now you order another 100 @ 1,30 EUR = 130 EUR stock value (stock > value > > > at > > > > goods receipt) > > > > > > > > The total stock is now 200 pcs at a value of 250 EUR = 1,25EUR/pcs. > Any > > > > withdrawal would mean: COGS = 1,25 EUR/piece > > > > > > > > Some time later you receive the invoice: with some reabates, you get > > > > charges 100pcs @ 1,24 = 124 EUR > > > > > > > > As you still have 100 on stock, you can reduce the material account > by 6 > > > > EUR = 200 pcs @ 244 EUR = 1,22 EUR/piece. > > > > > > > > That was the easy part. > > > > > > > > Now lets take a look if not sufficient stock is there. > > > > You have a stock of 100 pieces @ 1,20 EUR = 120 EUR stock value > > > > > > > > Now you order another 100 @ 1,30 EUR = 130 EUR (stock value at goods > > > > receipt) > > > > > > > > The total stock is now 200 pcs at a value of 250 EUR = 1,25EUR/pcs. > Any > > > > withdrawal would mean: COGS = 1,25 EUR/piece > > > > > > > > You sell 120 pcs @ 1,25 = 150 EUR value (Costs of good sold - COGS) > > > > > > > > Now you get the bill with additional freight costs on it, say 100 > pcs > > > @1,40 > > > > = 140 EUR. > > > > As you have only 80 pcs left on stock (value: 100 EUR) , you can > only > > > > charge a price difference for 80 pcs: > > > > > > > > 80 pcs *( 1,40€ - 1,30€) = 8 EUR > > > > Value of stock: 80 pcs , 108 EUR = 1,35 EUR/pcs > > > > > > > > The remainder has to go to the price difference account: > > > > 20 pcs *( 1,40€ - 1,30€) = 2 EUR (Expenses from price difference) > > > > > > > > At moving average, the stock value is always according to its > current > > > > price. If you start recalculating, you would have to change bookings > ex > > > > post, which would be wrong. > > > > > > This is exactly what does the re-computation. > > > > > > > Good. But I could not read this from the blueprint. Maybe you just add > the > > example, so it is easier to follow... > > Just test the code. > I prefer to first describe the functional requirement before starting to code. The method I described is common accounting practice. If you dont believe me, you should check with your accountant . HTH Axel
