Pricing Carbonless Paper
Posted: 17 Sep 2007 07:44 pm
I price per 1000 sheets. I put my stock price as 41.88 per 1000. When I price 3 part 8.5x11 1000 sets, the stock price is not bad. However at 2000 and 5000 it is way off. Goes way too low.
My carton is 5000 sheets of 8.5x11. A carton of 5000 sheets is 209.40 and there are no discounts. Seems like I would set my less than carton price at 41.88 per 1000 sheets. Seems like it would be easier to just be able to type the per 1000 price in and let it give you the price based on markup. It seems to want to discount the price.
You are on the right track. The feel is nice. I have to get used to it and it takes time to learn where things are at. Thanks, Jerry.
. . . . . jerryjfm
Joined: 12 Sep 2007 Posts: 2
First, the easy part: To keep the program from discounting paper prices, simply click the green One-Price button after you've entered your 1-carton price.
You say you're pricing carbonless per 1,000 sheets. In Morning Flight, all carbonless is priced per 1,000 "sets," with padding automatically included in the price. To get around that, you would first need to create a new product (call it "Carbonless Sheets") in the Sheets category. Then create a matching paper item in the Writing category. Then create a My Postpress item for Carbonless Collating and Padding . . . you get the drift. For standard sets, it's always easier to let Morning Flight do the work for you.
Non-standard Carbonless (different weights and colors, heavier backer, etc.) does have to be priced outside the Carbonless category, either as a Sheet or a Cover product, depending on the weight.
This probably hasn't answered all your questions, but it's a start. Let me know where I can fill in the gaps.
. . . . . Hal Heindel
Got it! Thanks. It is all in learning your wording. It came out really close to the system we now use. A few small changes and we will have it. We now use an old DOS estimating program and it can no longer be updated. It looks like yours is really coming along. I really like the look! It is rather flexible and that is nice. Thanks for the fast reply!
. . . . . Jerry