Go Back   EDI Talk - Discussions about Electronic Data Interchange, GIS, Inovis, Extol, SAP and more... > EDI - Electronic Data Interchange > General EDI Discussions > EDI Documents

Notices

EDI Documents EDI Documents Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-02-2010, 11:34 AM
Alessandro Zipoli's Avatar
Alessandro Zipoli Alessandro Zipoli is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NJ / NY
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 0
Alessandro Zipoli is on a distinguished road
Default SAC segment in 810

At the beginning of current season one of my customers granted an 8% unconditional discount to some of their US retailers.

Before that, one of these retailer had 10 EOM 8%.
So I removed the 8% from the ITD segment and added a SAC segment that discounts the invoice no matter what.
By the way, this is exactly how the original, paper invoice from the vendor looks like.

Recently I was called by the retailer's AP office. They say that the way the 810 look is wrong, that SAC segment may generate a double discount.

Who's right? Below is the ITD segment...

ITD*01*2***0**60
__________________
Alessandro Zipoli
Director of I.T. @ Fashion Logistics
Hasbrouck Heights, NJ
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-02-2010, 07:09 PM
tsmith tsmith is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 0
tsmith is on a distinguished road
Default

Looks wrong? EDI data is for processing, not reading.

I don't see how a double discount could be generated. Your ITD segment says NO discount.
But who knows what kind of processing they do, post-translation. Perhaps their programs ALWAYS take the standard discount regardless of what the 810 says. In that case, your SAC segment will/might create an additional discount.
You say their terms were 10 EOM, but your ITD segment says net 60 days. Maybe this is confusing them.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-03-2010, 04:40 PM
Alessandro Zipoli's Avatar
Alessandro Zipoli Alessandro Zipoli is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NJ / NY
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 0
Alessandro Zipoli is on a distinguished road
Smile

> Looks wrong? EDI data is for processing, not reading.

Go tell it to an account payable office


> You say their terms were 10 EOM, but your ITD segment says net 60 days

They were 10 EOM 8% in the past. When they granted an unconditional 8%, they also changed to NET 60.

TDS already shows the discounted amount (merchandise total less SAC allowance). They really shouldn't take an extra 8% if it isn't anywhere in the ITD.

Thank you
__________________
Alessandro Zipoli
Director of I.T. @ Fashion Logistics
Hasbrouck Heights, NJ
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-07-2010, 10:43 AM
Michael Mattias Michael Mattias is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 0
Michael Mattias is on a distinguished road
Default

Cash (terms) discounts are never put in a SAC segment, as it WILL upset the balance of th 810.

Cash (terms) discounts are reflected in the ITD and TDS segments.

TRADE discounts go in SAC segments
__________________
Michael Mattias<br />Tal Systems, Inc. <br />Racine WI <br />http://www.talsystems.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: [EDI-L] SN1 segment as Mandatory Giridhar Dittakavi EDI-L News Group 1 02-06-2009 01:35 AM
Re: [EDI-L] Re: SN1 segment as Mandatory Michael Nolen EDI-L News Group 0 02-05-2009 11:54 AM
[EDI-L] Re:SN1 segment as Mandatory Dunham Craig E. EDI-L News Group 1 02-05-2009 11:14 AM
Re: [EDI-L] SN1 segment as Mandatory VANI RAMAKA EDI-L News Group 0 02-05-2009 05:46 AM
[EDI-L] SN1 segment as Mandatory VANI RAMAKA EDI-L News Group 2 02-04-2009 11:07 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2008 EDITalk.com & ClearInternet.com