A business case for billing customer for asset use

One of my clients has a equipment which he hires it out for customers . Based on its usage (like if customers uses it for for more than some quantity ) then he wants to bill customer automatically . He says while service confirmation if quantity is of usage is more than some X unit , then automatic billing is to be triggered else no billing .
For equipment maintenance he wants PR to be created automatically from service order .After vendor invoicing , at service confirmation he wants to bill the customer with vendor invoice amount .
I am aware of PM order process , but can any one pl suggest step by step solution for the scenario ?
Thanks in advance
This is a duplicate [thread|http://forums.sdn.sap.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2084697&tstart=0]
Edited by: Paul Meehan on Nov 23, 2011 4:45 PM

regarding the selection of the servers based on the content requested, the current CSM is limited to match only 6 - 10 host name while the CSS has no limitation except the size of the config.
The only protocol that can be loadbalanced based on content - so layer 5-7 is HTTP and RTSP.
IF your citrix application makes use of these protocols, you can do L5/7 content rules.
My favorite between CSS and CSM is the CSM because of its ability to link a vserver/content rule to a vlan and because there is no such thing as garbage collection which is annoying on the CSS with long lasting flows.
Regards,
Gilles.

Similar Messages

Business Case for OCM

I am interested to see if anyone has any content they are able to share around the business case for OCM presented in a manner that has managers understand what the OCM game is about and why it is important to fund it and support it.

Our firm has incorporated OCM in our SAP/BPC delivery methodology and it has met with a very warm acceptance by our clients. Our OCM material has been maturing for over a decade, but is customized for each client, and clearly is a competitive advantage for us. So we are more than a bit hesitant to publish it to an open forum. I've been involved with OCM related work since 1991 and agree with many of the commentaries above regarding the 'critical' deal-breaking nature of well managed OC. I have a goofy mantra I use to describe this reality... "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't necessarily make him do the backstroke."
I have been saying for a long time that IT systems work is the technological equivalent of human organ transplant surgery. I use this analogy with our clients and it seems to help everyone get it intellectually. Just think of the key issue surrounding organ transplants and how that can be applied to our work. Compatibility of tissue, rejection, anti-rejection medication, severing of vital connections and reconnecting them (nerves, muscles, vessels, etc.). All the preparation that goes into it it (technically and emotionally).
Isnt' it interesting that when we introduce a new system that "replaces" an old one, the company, just like the human body, sends out corporate white blood cells to kill the foreign object even though its very life depends upon the survival of that object? So what do we do? We administer anti-rejection medication IN ADVANCE of the operation and after to ensure that NATURAL reaction does not happen. We have to take equivalent measures when we introduce new systems. The OCM issue then is to define what equals anti-rejection medication in a corporate envivronment. Our OCM discipline defines that and engages the organization in creating it and administering it to itself so it can optimize its success.
As for getting it in terms of the bottom line, y'all are right--that is a little tough for most of us to document, but you'd have to have been hiding under a rock and not read any relevant magazine, blog, or whitepaper for the past 15+ year to be so ignorant of this histoical fact. The IT landscape is littered with the dead or battered bodies of leaders and followers who have launched their ships unprepared to deal with this monster.
Our OCM kick-off Workshop seems to create in the minds of our clients a clear and undeniable gap between what they'd get if they don't take care of these matters.
Sorry to go so long on this, but it's one of my favorite topics as you can tell. Hope this is useful in some small way.

Business Package for Asset Services, implementation & integration

Hello,
We have installed Business Package for Asset Services in EP6.0 and integrated it with back-end system. The package works fine but on some iViews (equipmentpartners, functionallocationpartners, equipment, functionallocation, configurationshow) we have following runtime error:
Portal Runtime Error
An exception occurred while processing a request for :
iView : pcd:portal_content/com.sap.portal.migrated/ep_5.0/roles/com.sap.pct.eservice.operator/eservice/nf/InstallationManagm/com.sap.pct.eservice.partners.equipmentpartners
Component Name : null
Page could not create the iView.
See the details for the exception ID in the log file
Im novice in SAP EP and need help, can anyone help me please?
Best Regards
Raka

Dear Ranko and others,
The problem lies in the lowercase and uppercase of the specific shared ressources within the deployed file default.properties of the business partner. Also the link to the PDV isnt the same anymore.
I had the same problems and by analyzing the logs of the nwa I found this solution. Donwload the files and replace the names with lowercase and making the reference to th PDV as well. Then upload this packaged PAR file again.
Best regards
Henrik Koch

Business Package for Assets 50.3.1: Error in Source. Message not available

Hi
Just deployed the Business Package for Assets 50.3.1 on Portal version 7 with SP8, when running the Assets detail, my assets iviews always display: "Error in Source. Message not available."
even all other iviews on the same page still work as expected.
has anyone got the similar problem before? please help!!!
many thanks in advance!
Gang

When logged on to R/3, choose the following from the menu:
System > Status...
In screen area "SAP System data" click on the button next to "Component version".
Look for the component named only "PI", and check wether it exixts and what release it is, it should be at least 2003_1_XXX (where XXX represents your R/3 Appl version).
Also, check that you have the component "WP-PI" installed with the release 600_XXX (where XXX corresponds to your SAP Basis release).
I know I needed to check/install these two when I configured the Assets package.
/Christine

Install Business Content for Asset Accounting

Hi All
I am not able to install business content for Asset Accounting. I collected oFIAA info area with data flow before and afterwards and mode automatic. I checked the boxes for info objects, DSO multi providers etc and clicked installation and transport so as to get a transport request which I want to transport to production if all is well. It is prompting for a request which is already present and not allowing to change. I cancelled this process, created a new request in transport organizer and assigned the installation to this request. But afterwards it again prompted for the previous request and I aborted the process. What should I do to install the content as I don't want to transport a previous request since I didn't create it and I don't know what will happen if I transport. Sorry for the long story.
Regards
Subin

Some objects were already locked in the request , that could be the reason why It was prompting previous request number
Goto that request in SE09/SE10 - Remove the objects from the tasks or
Goto SE03 - Unlock Objects (Expert Tool) - enter request number and unlock all the objects from the request
Now goto Bus.content - Install and when it prompts for request enter new one
Note : I would suggest you to remove all the unwanted objects from old request though they are unlocked , In future it will be a problem if someone tries to use that request , or change description to do not transport so will people will think about this request not to use and transport

Advice on how to build a business case for partitioning

Hi Everyone,
I'm the architect of a business intelligence/data warehouse team. We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning. Our team is pretty unanimous for partitioning, many of our source system partners also consider it a "no-brainer", however, we're getting push back from our CIO saying that 1.5 TB and 100 million records isn't that much data as compared to other "big data" companies and that it doesn't require partitioning.
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
Thanks for your feedback.
-=Joe

I'm going to be contrarian and start from the end of your post.
>
Does anyone have a advice on how to build an business case for purchasing partitioning? Is there a good way to demonstrate cost-vs-benefit value?
>
Yes - forget about cost-vs-benefit. That's the CIOs job not yours. You're an architect. Stick to architecture. Design and implement the architecture needed to meet the business requirements of your projects. If you are given requirements that can't be met with your current infrastructure then that is when you should propose alternative infrastructure.
>
We've grown to the point where I believe we need database partitioning. I believe we are at about 1.5 TB of data. Our largest tables are in the 100 million row counts with relatively wide record lengths (~100 columns). Our just sort of large tables are in the 10 million to 50 million range, however, they have very long row lengths (~300 columns). Based on our future source system plans, our data will become even more granular and there is still a need to maintain our historical data.
Those aren't the only reasons, but are some of the larger driving issues that are making most members of our team think it's time we purchased database partitioning.
>
NONSENSE! That's what ALL of the above statements represent - UTTER AND ABSOLUTE NONSENSE.
Who cares what you believe? Beliefs don't carry weight, facts do. You do list some facts: 1.5 TB of data, 100 million row counts, wide record lengths, large sorts, long rows, data will get more granular, need to maintain historical data.
Ho Hum! So what? How do ANY of those facts indicate any sort of issue or problem, existing or potential, at all? They don't. You haven't provided information that suggests that ANY of those facts illustrate what Justin referred to as 'pain points'.
Unless those facts prevent you from doing your job of providing an architecture that meets the business requirements you don't have a leg to stand on.
My first reaction to your request would be similar to your cio's. Implicit in your cio's response are some questions you need to ask and answer
1. What is it that you do now that you can't do with the current architecture?
2. What is it that you need to do for an upcoming requirement that you can't do with the current architecture?
3. What alternatives are available to modify the current architecture to do what can't be done in items #1 and #2 above?
That #3 is where my skepticism lies. You seem to have already concluded that partitioning is the answer. Why? What problems do you think it will solve? Why not RAC? Why not a separate data warehouse system? Why not split that historical data off into an OLAP system? Maybe that can reduce the size of the OLTP system to where you won't have whatever problems you are having.
Partitioning is just about addressing some performance issues. A lot of times partitioning is used more for management purposes such as loading/offloading data without impacting those huge tables you are talking about.
If my hot queries use a primary key value to retrieve data it isn't going to matter much if the tables are partitioned or not.
That is what sets the context for what Justin is telling you. You and your team need to document the constraints (and SLAs) your system currently has, how close you are to hitting those constraints, your options for avoiding/evading those constraints using the current infrastructure and the options for avoiding/evading those constraints using a modified architecture.
It is up to the CIO to do the cost-benefit analysis of working within the limits imposed by the current infrastructure versus modifiying the architecture.

CC Individuals License vs Business License for Commercial Use

Can you use Creative Cloud "Individuals" license as opposed to "Business" license for commercial use if there is only one employee in the company using the applications?

As far as I know, there are no restrictions on what you DO with the software, bit there are different kinds of Cloud accounts based on how many licenses you wish to buy
Cloud License http://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms.html

OSB - Business Case for Adapters Vs Transport

Hi
1. Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc..
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.
Thanks!

Can you please explain me a business case on when one should use Db/JMS/FTP/File Adapter in OSB and when should one go in for equivalent transports for configuring Business/Proxy services? Would be great if you could point me to some documentation on which approach should be chosen over the other/any benefits that a particular approach has etc.. For DB, you have to use DB adapter in OSB beacuse there is no seprate transport defined for DB. For FILE, you have both options - FILE transport and FILE adapter (in OSB 11g). FILE transport should be the preferred option (never seen documented anywhere) as it has been designed as part of the product and hence should be faster (although never comapred). For JMS and FTP, you have to use respective transports defined in OSB because OSB does not support JCA adapters for FTP/JMS (you may refer - 25.2.1 Adapter Support
at http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E14571_01/doc.1111/e15866/jca.htm#BABBICIA)
2. Also is there some Oracle Documentation available on comparision between OSB and BPEL? When should a particular product be chosen? I tried searching for an example with a business scenario which provides details on when to use OSB and when to use BPEL but havent been able to get much info.OSB is a dedicated routing product and must be used for scenarios where only routing is required along with light transformations. Being a stateless product OSB can bear heavy load as well as gives better performance. BPEL can do what OSB does (to a certain extent) but being a statefull product it is much slower than OSB and should be used only for scenarios where process orchestration/human workflow intervention is required.
OSB being a service bus, can mediate among almost each and every kind of protocols but BPEL would need adapters for such mediation.
Regards,
Anuj

What's the business case for using adobe forms for handling print forms

Hi
We are just starting our SAP project and are looking at the possibility to use Adobe forms for generating and printing our forms, like purchase orders, invoices etc.
My Question is:
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - <i> We have been looking on the SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high</i>
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
Regards
Morten Nielsen

Hi Morten,
1. Is this possible / adviseable ?
As far I know SAP is going to stop support for SAPScript in coming years (I don't know exact dates). It is pretty much advisable to use Adobe Print Forms.
2. if so - what's the business case in using Adobe forms - We have been looking on the
SAP Pricing for adobe interactive form, and in our point of view it's grotesque high
We can use Adobe Print Forms where ever we can able to use SApscripts/PDF print Forms.
3. What other options do we have - do we need to settle with SAP Script / Smartforms ?
It is better to settle with Adobe forms rather than using SAPscript/Smart forms. One of the main reason for this is maintainance is much easier than SAPscript/Smart forms.
But remember that Java Stack need to be installed in order to use Adobe Forms.
Please visit the below SDN area on Adobe forms for more details.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/interactiveforms
Thanks
Ramakrishna
Message was edited by:
Ramakrishna Ramisetti

Business Object for asset accounting/capitalization

Hello frineds,
I need to develop a work flow to notify IO owner when IO status changes to RELEASED.
my workflow needs to be triggered once we save the internal order.
1) I am not getting any Business Object for this asset accounting. do u have any suggestion?
2) Can u tell me how to save the internal order through which my workflow is getting triggered?
My requirement is to use the transaction * CJ92 , CJ20N, ko02 or ko04 * for changing the IO status to released.
Thanks,
Romanch

Hi,
In the transaction KO02, U can find one tab Control data, In that Control data tab u can change the status to released.
Thanks and Regards,
Chandra M

Need Business Case for iBook and DayTimer Stuff

I'm having a hard time trying to find a case for my iBook that still has room for my 8.5 x 11 Day Timer portfolio that looks, how shall I say, "professional"??? I'm one of those Bible carryin' guys, too. Help, suggestions?

Hi Gebo,
What size do you have? Do you want metal, leather, or other? Do you want a messenger type bag, brief case, or something else? I personally like the:
Targus radius Leather Messenger
Anything by Folee
McKlein V Series Morgan
McKlein I Series River
Jon
G4 1.33Ghz iBook, G4 iMac 1Ghz, G3 500Mhz iBook, Macintosh 128K, eMate... Mac OS X (10.4.5) Airport EX, Moto Razr, iLife '06, SmartDisk 160Gb, Apple BT Mouse, Sight..

BIA - business case and sizing customer experiences

I am looking for a BIA implementation for a global, mid-size company, 2Tb database, 1500+ unique users pe rmonth....wanted to learnf orm your experiences, % improvements in performance and how you went about building your busienss case, etc.

Hello,
A My clients current method for replacement:
1. I suppose you are using serial number management. So find the original billing docment.
2. Do a Return SO, but make it free of charge (item category). GR and Return CM in SD only 0.00
3. After Return CM do a normal Sales Order, maybe use a special order type or item catgeory (Expired Warranty Replacement)
4. The price in the sales order will eqal the costs, I would assume it would be estimated or manually determine pricing condition.
5. DN, PGI and Billing to the customer
OR
B. Use CS where service orders can be created, but it's a big beast. Basically the service costs are all linked and inputted, with service notifications, etc. I would you would only use this if you were one of SAP's big tier customers.
Regards
Waza

Decimal places are not permitted for asset useful life

Dear SAP experts,
I need to post a new net book value on a new depreciation area 50 for fixed assets. The new deprecation for depreciation area 50 will start in July 2011 on all existing (also fully depreciated or to be disposed) assets with a different useful life unlike the book deprecation for depreciation area 01. The depreciation method for depreciation area 50 is straight line.
I have a requirement to assign the new useful life for the depreciation area 50 which may contain decimals, for example 5.5 years. Basically, I need to depreciate the asset for the remaining 6 months of 2011 and the entire 2012 to 2016.
SAP does not allow decimals on asset useful life (Decimal places are not permitted, Message no. 00011).
Have you come accross a similar situation? How can that be managed via depreciation methods and keys?
Please advise.
Thank you in advance,
Inna

Hi Inna,
You can define your useful life of 5.5 years for the depreciation area 50 as follows:
Useful life : 5
period : 6
here, useful life(5) represents 5 years and period(6) as 6 months which gives you 5.5 years starting depreciation from Depreciation calculation start date.
Kind Regards,
Mehul

IPad 2 case for student use?

Hi!
I'm going to buy an iPad 2 for use in medical school. To protect it I need a case.
I have read alot online, but it seems that there really isn't that many suggestions for students specifically.
Criteria:
1. Protect: protecting the back, sides, corners and screen as much as possible without adding to much bulk.
2. Sleep/wake feature: support the magnetic sleep/wake feature of the iPad 2.
3. Typing: have a nice and stable typing stance. I will not be using an external keyboard, but rather do all of the typing straight on the iPad 2.
I hope someone can help me out.

If compactness is important, and you are comfortable with the on screen keyboard, then you probably want to avoid the cases with built in bluetooth keyboards. They will add size and wieght (to a dgree) and certainly cost.Beyond that, you will have to make some decisions about what you need the case to do.
For example, when I picked up the case I am currently using for my new iPad, I wanted low cost (I'm rough on them so will need to replace at some point), decent padding to protect from bumps and such, and to be able to easily get it out of the case since I like using the ipad without a case when I feel it is safe. The smart cover feature was not a concern since i find that peice of functionality to be a waste of time. I ended up with a Rocket Fish. Simple design, meets my needs and i don't have much invested, so easy enough to replace if I run accross something a lot better. (also, this was early on and there weren't a lot of cases in the stores yet). Obviously, from the information provided, that case wouldn't be to your liking.
If you have the ability to, go and actually look at and hold some cases. very often that tells you more about how well the case would work than reccomendations and reveiws. and make sure you are clear on what you need the case to do.
For out and out protection, however, you probably can't do much better than Otterbox. My company has deployed iPads on construction sites and chose the Otterbox Defender as the REQUIRED case for all iPad orders.

Business Case for SOA

Hi,
We run all our systems on Oracle (including eBusiness Suite, Oracle database for bespoke apps, Oracle Spatial, etc.) and have been able to use database links to join everything together very nicely. We mainly use APEX to produce easy-to-use applications, achieving very rapid development cycles. We also use JDeveloper to generate JSP pages.
Yet I keep getting pressured to migrate to a Service Oriented Architecture. Why should I? What business benefits would we get? Every time I look at it it seems to me that we would need to spend money on new server software, on more training for our developers and our productivity would take a serious hit.
Am I missing something?
Patrick.

Hi. I think there is a lot of hype around SOA. If you realize that SOA is really about architecting and implementing that are easily developed, easily managed, easily extended, easily debugged, then you can get a sense of what SOA is about. Vendors will hype their own particular approach to a Service Oriented Architecture. I think what you have to think about is why you are "being pressured" to think SOA.
In my mind, any solution must be architected and implemented keeping in ind the overall project lifecycle cost of ownership. This includes cost of architecting, developing, debugging, deploying, operating, extending, depreciating, end-of-life'ing, and replacing. Therefore, any products, techniques, approaches that you take to mnimize the overall cost is a good thing.
Therefore, governance plays a very very strong part here. SOA governance is fundamentally about knowing what you have, what you need, and how to get there in the most expedient manner possible.
Anyway, I could talk at length on this subject, but hopefully you get a flavor for why SOA.

A business case for billing customer for asset use

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for