Two SD issues, please help me.

[Former Member]

Hi All,

There are 2 issues:

Issue 1:

How to block a delivery when sales price is smaller

than cost in sales order? How to set the

configuration in SPRO?

Issue 2:

I have an issue regarding SIS captures the sales price

as 0 when there is no pricing condition created for

the material.

Is there a way for SIS SALES FORECAST of not capturing

the sales price if there is no pricing condition

(PR00) of that material (Key combination:

customer/material) created ?

I also wonder if there is a way to set the SALES PRICE

(PR00) of material as required field in SIS?

Thanks for your help.

[Former Member]

Hi,

To make sure that basic price of the material is not maintained than the cost price, during condition record maintenance clink on the icon details and specify minimum price as cost price, then user cannot maintain price of material lower than the cost price.

[Former Member]

Hi,

For the first issue use userexit_save_document in MV45AFZZ.

Find "form userexit_save_document."

Insert the following.

LOOP AT xvbap where UPDKZ ne 'D'.

IF xvbap-netwr < xvbap-wavwr.

MESSAGE w002(zsd) WITH xvbap-posnr."Sales price is smaller than cost !!!'.

endif.

endloop.

[Former Member]

Hi,

For the first issue use userexit_save_document in MV45AFZZ .Here you can write the code to compare the two values in XKONV table and if your condition is not satisfied you can automatically set the delivery block.Consult your ABAPer as well.

For SIS this process in very well explained in Glynn Williams page no 398-409.

Reward points if useful

Regard,

Amrish Purohit

Message was edited by:

AMRISH PUROHIT

[Former Member]

HI Alex,

Let me try to answer.

Issue 1.

I can think of capturing the cost at minimum order value so that when the order value is less than minimum order value or cost, further processing is restricted.

Issue 2.

Probably you can capture this at the routine assigned to the infostructure ( update rules ) in such a way that when PR00 is 0, particular SIS is not updated.

You can probably address the last requirement also at routine level in the update rules.

Thanks & Regards,

CLN