rebates from 2 agreements for the same condition

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

i am facing an issue. I am trying to create 2 rebate agreements 205, 206, with different agreement type Z001 , Z002 and assigned with same condition group.

for both agreement i entered the condition record with the same access ( Sales Org / Distr.chnl / shipto / plant )

thus I got the following result in the billing document ( condition tab on item )

condition ZB12 was found twice with different agreements.

Example 2

this time i create the third agreement 207 with condition records with different access sequence ( Sales org / Distr.chl/ shipto ) which is after the previous, the result is : this agreement with the price can not be found.

Question:

1. Is it possible to let 2 different agreements working for the same condition record e.g. ZB12 but with different access sequence ?

2. I have tried with different agreement type and same agreement type, it seems has nothing to do with agreement type, the only essential criteria is, whether the condition record is created with the same access sequence or not. Is that correct ?

By the way I have checked the thread, however found nothing ...

can anyone help me out ?

thanks!!!

Reck

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

2. I have tried with different agreement type and same agreement type, it seems has nothing to do with agreement type, the only essential criteria is, whether the condition record is created with the same access sequence or not. Is that correct ?

Recke,

The rebate value populates in a billing document only depends upon if a valid condition record is found in the billing document.

For a valid condition record -

- the rebate condition type

- the values maintained in the condition table (i.e. variable key) should match that of the transaction data

- the service rendered date in the bill should lie in between the valid from and to of the condition record.

Nothing else is taken into consideration (no access sequence, or rebate agreement type etc.)

TW

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi, thanx for the answer of you both,

the business request is actually we can have sold to and payer in process. There could be 2 different rebate agreements with sold to and payer.

Thus in the end, the purpose is to let the sold to and payer get separately the rebate accordingly, that is the reason we are seeking for a solution that 2 agreements can represent in one billing document separately.

maybe the solution would be we would try to create different condition types for these 2 agreements, so both can be valued in the billing.

Do you know any other solutions ?

thanks!

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

Recke,

This is a scenario which occurs in business, a customer and its partner (for example store) both get some incentives when the same sale is done. For example, your company is selling motorbikes, the Sold to party gets 2% rebate and the store that keeps the bike and sells it (pos) gets 0.5% on the same sale of a bike.

In this business scenario, your company creates 2 rebate agreements, one for the SP and the other for the partner (store) and in the billing document, accruals should reflect for both these customers.

Technically,

- You don't need different rebate condition types, for each rebate agreement

- You don't need different rebate agreement types, with only one rebate agreement type, business can create 2 rebate agreements

Creating two different rebate condition types can give more clarity and differentiation between the two rebate agreement types but in this case, this might not be required. As it is a same type of process. If it was local sale and international sale, maybe you would have two rebate condition types, one for each rebate agreement type.

Another downside of multiple condition type is the configuration and setup, i.e. maintaining these in the pricing procedure, which for rebate functionality is not required.

Summary - Your example with agreements 205 and 206 already shows the solution has been tested, you could go ahead with it.

TW

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi, TW Typerwriter,

thanks first for your detailed explaination!!very helpful and very kind of you.

the example of 205 206 can work for the same billing,

however under one precondition, that i have to use same access sequence for the condition type , so that both of them can be found.

but in reality, it could be possible that the rebate for customer would be every month and the access would be sales org / distr.chl/ sold-to

and for the store it could be per year and with access sales org/ distr.chl/ material

( scenario could also be sub company - group company , the rebate on sub company could based on material , but on group company would not be material specific)

then only one can work in the billing. For this reason , a solution need to be found.

thanks!

regards

Reck

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

Recke,

In a billing document, two rebate condition types can be determined even if these have different access sequence (or have the same access sequence).

In your message - Access has  not been executed due to previous access

Access here is condition table and not access sequence.

Search in google with this error message and you will get lots of information and then try to apply that to your test cases.

TW

Note: Do your rebate access sequences have exclusive indicator activated?

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

hi, Typerwriter,

to your question in Note: ---- yes there is exclusive indicator, and that is also the reason why only one can be found. the other access will not be continoue searched ( yes with message Access has  not been executed due to previous access) .

but we need this exlusion indicator. .... Is this what you mean in ur last reply ?

Reck

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

Recke,

In our conversations, we should be very clear and not interchange access and access sequence

In a access sequence several accesses (condition tables) be maintained. And your access sequence has exclusive indicator activated. So once valid condition record for REB1 is found it will not go down to the remaining condition tables, so REB2 will not be found, even though a match condition record exists (match of condition record with information in the billing document).

(as you have also commented)

Yes, in this design (exclusive indicator activated) you need different access sequences, so that both rebate condition types are found.

TW

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

thus we now considering the solution by creating different condition type for different agreement( types ),

one type with one customer we can only have one agreement

and we would take out the exclusion indicator in the access seqence

then we can have different access in different agreements.

alternative I can not find any better solutions.

what do you think ?

Regards

Reck

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

Recke,

In your previous post

but we need this exlusion indicator.

Are you saying you will remove the exclusive indicator assigned in the access sequence? Or NOT?

Please confirm this. Is the above an option for your client?

TW

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

this is what I can think of,

if there is no other option, then we can only try to sell this option mentioned above ( without exclusion indicator ) to the user, and rebuilt all the condition record.

In addition, the user need to pay attention that no more than one rebate agreement with one customer can be created.

it is not what we want at the beginning, thats why I made this question here

[former_member182378 · Accepted solution]

Recke,

The reason why your third agreement 207 does not get any accruals from this (same) billing document is because the access (condition table) for this is not processed by the system because system stops once it finds the access (condition table) for 205 and 206.

The above is happening because of the exclusion indicator in your access sequence.

For SP you can use the same access sequence, no change in this.

For the store you can create a new access sequence with only access (condition table) as sales org/dis channel/ material.

Both will have different condition types and different access sequence. By this all the rebate agreements will find accrual value from the same billing document.

TW

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi TW Typerwriter,

yes this is the approach we are going to taken, maybe we would use same access sequence for these 2 condition types . But we would take out the exclusion indicator in access sequence.

thanks for the help !

Regards

Recke

[former_member184806]

Hi Recke,

I was recently practicing Rebate Processing in my test system and I came across the same issue. I created another agreement and kept everything same and as a result the rebate condition came 2 times in the order.

I am not sure how that can be avoided but I believe that in actual practice this should not happen.

When for one customer, in one sales org and for one particular plant you have set a rebate condition then why should there be another agreement for the same combination.

In your case you are giving the customer 5 Eur and 6 Eur rebate for the same Sales Org/ Dist Ch/ Ship to and Plant combination.

Logical there should be just one agreement for the same combination or there has be to be some change in the criteria of giving rebate.

Regards,

Vishal