Pricing model for everyday newspaper

Hello I want to use DPS for an everyday publication
Its going to be an 50 pages newspaper.
I want to have a reader application that can be updated everyday with the new material.
Its not important to have old issues just the current....
What will be the best price model?
This news paper will be free for the people that download it
so
any ideas?
Do adobe charge me for everydownload even the publication will be free?

Hi Satish,
Either the customer buys a customer account directly from SAP or the Partner sells a ready solution directly to the customer: SAP HANA Cloud Platform. If you are asking about the second option, here are the answers of your questions:
1. No the partner buys a HCP account and then sells his solution to the customer.
2. There are two models: between SAP and Partners and then between Partners and Customers. The first one is described in the link above, the second one is up to the partner.
Kind Regards,
Alex

Similar Messages

OT: Adobe is considering new pricing models for Creative Cloud

Adobe is considering new pricing models for Creative Cloud. Please excuse me if someone posted this already.
http://photorumors.com/2013/06/16/adobe-is-considering-new-pricing-models-for-creative-clo ud/#ixzz2WRiE1dLX

Next year they will bring back perpetual license for customers prepared to pay over the top prices. Microsoft has done it so Adobe and others will just copy them. Who said there is morality in business?

Tiered Pricing Model

Is there a way to implement a tiered pricing model for Offerings so that employees are charged one rate, contingent workers are charged another, and outside customers are charged a third rate?
Thanks!
Anne

Hi Anne,
If you use OM integration to OLM you could have two different pricelists for customers and internal workers. But there is no way to separate out employees and contingent workers.
Regards
Anders

I am considering a base 21" iMac ($1099 @ Best Buy) for home use. It would be my first Mac. Is the base model powerful enough for everyday home use and some light video editing or should I upgrade the CPU, Ram and to a Fusion drive?

I am considering a base 21" iMac ($1099 @ Best Buy) for home use. It would be my first Mac. Is the base model powerful enough for everyday home use and some light video editing or should I upgrade the CPU, Ram and to a Fusion drive?
Purchasing with the upgrades through Apple would add about $800 over the Black Friday deal at Best Buy. Just looking for some advice if I will be satisfied with the based model.

All models will do what you want. Upgraded models will do it faster than the standard models.
Just why are you thinking of switching to a Mac?

Service Desk: Pricing data for partner could not be read

Hi all,
I am trying to configure the Service Desk functionality for Service Providers (on EHP1).
I follow the SAP Documentation (SAP Solution Manager: Service Desk for Service Providers) and SLA's made easy in SAP Solution Manager. Also some discussion threads helped me with some steps (I applied e.g. the recommendation from Pricing data for partner 106 could not be read. , but it didn't help).
I am facing some errors related to the CRM part of the configuration.
When I create Service Desk Contract (SLFV) in CRMD_ORDER, the error appears Pricing data for partner xxx could not be read. I checked the setting of BP and I am not able to find the reason, for customer's (sold-to-party) BP the sold-to-party > Sales Area Data the Sales Organization/Distribution Channel/Division are maintained. Which information for pricing is needed and where can it be configured?
Another error - I am sure it is related to the first one - the service contract cannot be determined in the service message (in Item details view under product). The error messages are about sales area/organization, so I suppose there is something wrong with the link Service Contract -> Business Partner definition.
Could you please help me what can cause the error?
Thanks in advance,
Vaclav

Hi Balaji.S,
my problem was solved when I double checked the settings of org structure. That means there must be a consistent setting for sales organization / distribution channel / division in businness partner (tcode BP), organizational model (PPOMA_CRM), product workbench (COMMPR01). The setting must be same for both the sales department of the service provider and the customer's company (I am sorry I am not CRM, so I am following just this simple logic)
In the long text of the error (in CRMD_ORDER) I could see "expected" combination for sales organization / distribution channel / division (message e.g. The access was carried out with sales organization 'O 50000613', distribution channel '01' and division '') -> when the org model was set up everywhere in this way, the contract was automatically filled by the organization data and in the next step the contract could be determined in the service desk message.
Anyway it took some time to find out the correct combination. Deeper CRM knowledge would help me much.
Vaclav

What are the key benefits and limitations of new pricing model of X5-2?

What are the key benefits and limitations of new pricing model that started with X5 version?

1. Elastic Configurations
Size/price hardware by the number of servers; Fixed configs no longer required
Start with 2 Database Servers and 3 Storage Servers. Incrementally add database or storage servers online.
2. Capacity-on-Demand (CoD)
Upon installation, activate 40-100% of the cores per server and reduce software licenses; Applies to Eighth Rack now too
Activate and license more cores when needed; Active cores may not be deactivated
3. OVM and Trusted Partitions
License software on Virtual CPUs within a VM; Ideal for special-purpose DB options
You can mix different combination of options for different DB on one Exadata.
OVM has no License cost; support is included with premier hardware support
Limitation:
At least 40% of usable cores on the machine must be licensed for Oracle software
Cannot use both OVM and CoD to license less than 40% of cores
A server must be virtualized or non-virtualized – not mixed
A RAC cluster can mix virtualized and non-virtualized servers
4. “Flash Drive” License Metric for EF Storage Server Software
$20K/drive; 8 flash drives/EF server vs 12 disk drives/HC server = 33% higher list
Can transfer licenses between Flash Drive (2 licenses/drive) and Disk Drive (1 license/drive) – part # is the same

New "throttled" ICE pricing model proposal to Adobe

First off I agree that the ICE service should not be free, but for it to be worth while from a business standpoint, and at $20 per month paid to Adobe, the "web shop" would need to charge at least $10 per month to each client to use the service. It's a given that most clients won't want to pay more than $10 a month for the ICE service unless their web site is a large one. So if Adobe needs $20 a month for 5 domains in the current price proposal, the web shop would need to have 2 clients using it right away just to break even and acquire 3 clients just to start making a profit. The proposed pricing model puts much more "pressure" on the web shop's side to sign people up on the service as fast as possible starting out. The situation becomes even more evident if the web shop has 6 clients and is now paying $40 a month to Adobe for two base accounts. With 5 clients and one base account the web shop profits $50-($20 to Adobe)=$30 total per month. With 6 clients and two base accounts the web shop profit takes a dip with $60-($40 to Adobe)=$20 total profit per month. So the current pricing model becomes a kind of stair-stepping profit and loss situation for the web shop when they don't have each base account "loaded up" per say.
A MUCH better pricing strategy for both Adobe and web shop owners would be for Adobe to create an initial 3 domain base account for $10 a month and then "throttle the price" for each additional domain. This would lower the initial profit risk for the web shop greatly. Let me illustrate... Let's say Adobe charges a base price of $10 a month for a 3 domain base account to start with. Then for every NEW domain there is an additional $5 a month charge. Ok, so let's say the web shop has 5 client domains... now we have a a base price of $10 (3 domains in the base) + 2 NEW domains and that's a total of a $20 total per month paid to Adobe. Now for 5 domains Adobe is STILL making the $20 a month it needs. At this point though, the web shop has 5 committed ICE clients and is charging a minimum of $10 per domain so they receive $50 per month minus the $20 paid back to Adobe for a total profit of $30 per month. If the web shop has 6 client domains then the total profit is $25 to Adobe rather than having to pay $40 per month with the current proposed pricing model. Now we must look at how this pricing strategy "benefits" Adobe, because at 6 domains Adobe was previously getting $40 for two base accounts with 5 domains in each. BUT if they go with a throttled pricing model those same 10 domains now would mean $45 per month ($10 base + 7 new domains at $5 each for $35) instead of the previous $40 per month for Adobe. Ok, wait a second (I can hear most of you saying it now) why would we now pay Adobe an extra $5 per month for 10 domains? The answer is simple, because previously they would be getting $40 a month for say 6 domains whereas now they would only get (($10 + 3 new domains x $5 each = $15)) = a total of $25 per month for 6 domains. This is very fair because Adobe now takes on a lower rate per month as the domain counts ramp up, but now at the 10 domain mark they would be getting $45 per month instead of $40.
Overall this strategy eliminates the starting risk for the web shop, ensures the web shop's profit right away, and in the long run Adobe profits a little bit more for higher domains counts. Both sides get a much better deal with a throttled pricing model!
And as a last note of "profitable hope" for the web shop readers, you could also base your ICE monthly service price on the size of each client's web site. For example: 20 pages or less = $10 per month, 21- 50 pages = $15 per month and for large web sites above 50 pages you could go with $20 per month. This is actually still fair, because if you think about it you still have to provide ICE code support for each page should something go wrong and provide support for ICE user e-mail questions, training, etc. So the more page support you have to deal with code-wise, e-mail-wise, or even phone-wise the more it should justify a higher monthly cost back to your client for having a larger web site to maintain overall.

First off I agree that the ICE service should not be free, but for it to be worth while from a business standpoint, and at $20 per month paid to Adobe, the "web shop" would need to charge at least $10 per month to each client to use the service. It's a given that most clients won't want to pay more than $10 a month for the ICE service unless their web site is a large one. So if Adobe needs $20 a month for 5 domains in the current price proposal, the web shop would need to have 2 clients using it right away just to break even and acquire 3 clients just to start making a profit. The proposed pricing model puts much more "pressure" on the web shop's side to sign people up on the service as fast as possible starting out. The situation becomes even more evident if the web shop has 6 clients and is now paying $40 a month to Adobe for two base accounts. With 5 clients and one base account the web shop profits $50-($20 to Adobe)=$30 total per month. With 6 clients and two base accounts the web shop profit takes a dip with $60-($40 to Adobe)=$20 total profit per month. So the current pricing model becomes a kind of stair-stepping profit and loss situation for the web shop when they don't have each base account "loaded up" per say.
A MUCH better pricing strategy for both Adobe and web shop owners would be for Adobe to create an initial 3 domain base account for $10 a month and then "throttle the price" for each additional domain. This would lower the initial profit risk for the web shop greatly. Let me illustrate... Let's say Adobe charges a base price of $10 a month for a 3 domain base account to start with. Then for every NEW domain there is an additional $5 a month charge. Ok, so let's say the web shop has 5 client domains... now we have a a base price of $10 (3 domains in the base) + 2 NEW domains and that's a total of a $20 total per month paid to Adobe. Now for 5 domains Adobe is STILL making the $20 a month it needs. At this point though, the web shop has 5 committed ICE clients and is charging a minimum of $10 per domain so they receive $50 per month minus the $20 paid back to Adobe for a total profit of $30 per month. If the web shop has 6 client domains then the total profit is $25 to Adobe rather than having to pay $40 per month with the current proposed pricing model. Now we must look at how this pricing strategy "benefits" Adobe, because at 6 domains Adobe was previously getting $40 for two base accounts with 5 domains in each. BUT if they go with a throttled pricing model those same 10 domains now would mean $45 per month ($10 base + 7 new domains at $5 each for $35) instead of the previous $40 per month for Adobe. Ok, wait a second (I can hear most of you saying it now) why would we now pay Adobe an extra $5 per month for 10 domains? The answer is simple, because previously they would be getting $40 a month for say 6 domains whereas now they would only get (($10 + 3 new domains x $5 each = $15)) = a total of $25 per month for 6 domains. This is very fair because Adobe now takes on a lower rate per month as the domain counts ramp up, but now at the 10 domain mark they would be getting $45 per month instead of $40.
Overall this strategy eliminates the starting risk for the web shop, ensures the web shop's profit right away, and in the long run Adobe profits a little bit more for higher domains counts. Both sides get a much better deal with a throttled pricing model!
And as a last note of "profitable hope" for the web shop readers, you could also base your ICE monthly service price on the size of each client's web site. For example: 20 pages or less = $10 per month, 21- 50 pages = $15 per month and for large web sites above 50 pages you could go with $20 per month. This is actually still fair, because if you think about it you still have to provide ICE code support for each page should something go wrong and provide support for ICE user e-mail questions, training, etc. So the more page support you have to deal with code-wise, e-mail-wise, or even phone-wise the more it should justify a higher monthly cost back to your client for having a larger web site to maintain overall.

Not allowed to buy TV model for the advertised price

My current TV stopped working and I found on BestBuy.com a Samsung 55" 1080p Smart 3D model that asked for my name and email before I could receive a price. Once doing so I was told the 55" was no longer available, so I tried the 60" and was quoted $1104.99 (SKU:4327014). I decided to stop by my local store (New Hope Commons, Durham, NC) who said they were out of stock for that SKU and didn't have a like comparison for under $1,200.
Before leaving the store, I decided to purchase what I had in my online cart from my phone. Checkout would not complete the order stating item not available for shipping to your store. So I tried a different store and tried shipping to my home address. I could not find a store in my state, that it would ship. So I called the customer service number and was told that model is no longer available in my region. Even though the site asked for my information before I continued to check out and had some basis for inventory since it knew that the 55" I originally wanted, was not available.
While the customer service rep was looking up similar models for an alternative, I walked passed a Samsung 55" 1080p Smart 3D on the wall as a display unit being sold as an open item for $1439 (SKU:4323036). During the "negotiation" over the next 30 min, with me attempting to have Best Buy honor something close to it's advertised price. The instore representatives (professional and courteaous) would only reduce the open box item to $1263 (No accessories, I would still have to purchase 3D glasses). Even though the same piece of paper was advertising the 46" and 60" of the same model NEW for $1,199 (They are just not available). My apoligies I didn't catch the SKU of the 60" version on the instore ad, though I did get a picture of it.
So, you have the TV I want in my local store, but want to charge me more than the next size up for the current sale? The 60" shows as available online, but the phone representative stated Best Buy was not willing to ship it from "a warehouse in a different region".

Hello dp0akley-
When searching for my last TV, I did a lot of comparisons around picture quality, size and definitely pricing, so I can understand your frustration at finding the TV you wanted, but not at a price you would have liked.
There are occasions where a promotion with the manufacturer or the pricing from the manufacturer may cause a larger size TV to be cheaper than smaller TV’s. In those situations, we are not able to lower the price of a smaller TV to match that of a larger TV. In general, open box pricing is not negotiable and is set, so hearing that the store was willing to work with you to find a good price is nice to hear. The open box TV you listed is not available on BestBuy.com, so it wouldn’t have been the same price as the one you saw on BestBuy.com.
BestBuy.com represents the entire US, so depending on the product, it may not be available everywhere. In this case, the 60” TV you were looking at is a discontinued model, so would most likely explain the lack of availability in your area. We do not ship TV’s of this size from store to store unless the stores share a common warehouse.
It sounds like in this case, of the TV’s you are interested in; your best bet may be the open box one the Durham store has available.
I apologize for any disappointment that this may cause you.
Sincerely,
Bill|Senior Social Media Specialist | Best Buy® Corporate
Private Message

Pricing Model

Back in mid-February some blog posts said that a pricing
model would be out in a few weeks. Has a candidate pricing model
been posted? If so, where can I find it? If not, when will it be
made available?

Thank you for your patience! Please refer to this blog post
for details. We would very much appreciate your feedback on our
proposed pricing models.
http://blogs.adobe.com/collabmethods/2009/03/chomping_at_the_bit_afcs_prici_1.html

Black Scholes Option Pricing Model

Hello Folks
Here is a Black Scholes Option Pricing Model that includes CALLs, PUTs, and the Greeks plus a vi to create an option chain.
If someone could translate this to native LV code OR possibly a DLL it would benifit interested traders, It was developent on a professional version platform using the MatLabscript node.
The zip file contains the BSM, a web browser app for quick stock lookups, and some symbol files. You will need to tweak the Research VI a little to point it to the symbol file.
I pulled these out of a woking app so other than the minor tweeks everything was working....
Best Regards
Tim C.
1:30 Seconds ARRRGHHH!!!! I want my popcorn NOW! Isn't there anything faster than a microwave!
Attachments:
OptionTradingWorkbook.zip ‏59 KB
BSM and Research.zip ‏543 KB

Here are the sub vi's to the research VI. These VIs are the old version of calulating the Call and Put before I finalized the mod to the BSM matscript. The reason i included it was so th euser could get the implied volatility formula to add to the BSM updated model.
The intent of releasing this was simply to get it out ot folks in the hopes of saving a bunch of research and testing.....
Best regards
Tim C.
1:30 Seconds ARRRGHHH!!!! I want my popcorn NOW! Isn't there anything faster than a microwave!
Attachments:
Option Put Price and Greeks old version.zip ‏351 KB

Can't see pricing options for Creative Cloud. :'(

Two things, Adobe:
1. When I try to click the "See All Plans" button on this page (Cloud-based software and services for creatives | Adobe Creative Cloud) I'm taken to a blank page (except for the unhelpful footer). The error console on my browser says there are a couple of errors, which are usually where this comes from.
plans:237 -- ReferenceError: Can't find variable: s
test_and_target.js:1:132 -- ReferenceError: Can't find variable: mboxDefine
I would love to see the pricing options for this service that you've built into all of your applications, but apparently I can't.
2. Apparently the forum is the only way to tell you guys about technical problems?

Hi ChristofferLu,
Please refer the knowledge base article: http://helpx.adobe.com/creative-cloud/help/cc-desktop-download-error.html.
Regards,
Romit Sinha

Error :Maintain pricing conditions for the material for the excise invoice

Hi
i have maintained excise data for material, after that i have created scheduled agreement with lp and with 0 value private and dummy tax code and delivery schedule is released. Now when i do the goods receipt i am getting error " Maintain pricing conditions for the material for the excise invoice date
Message no. 8I629" can some body can help me.
with regards
Narendra kumar

Hi,
goto tcode fv11 u have to maintained the condition.
first enter the condition type like jmop -
then enter, next screen u have the select the below comination.
select the plant/vendor/material base u have to maintain the conditions.
Thank's
MVS

Excise duty in the Pricing Procedure for Local Purchase / Importation

Hi,
I'd like to know how to set up the pricing procedure for the purchase of an IS Oil Material; for local purchase and importation, especially with regards to the excise duty posting.
Local purchase: the vendor will bill us inclusive of the ED tax he previously paid, so the tax is just passed on to us.. My receiving location has ED paid status. In the PO item, we need to see this price (inclusive of tax) in the net price field.
Importation: the vendor only bills us the cost of the material. When we received the fuel, we paid ED tax to local tax authorities.
I know that both in these scenarios, the system has to determine the excise duty.
My questions are (1) how do you set up the excise duty condition type in the pricing procedure(or do they have to be maintained in the pricing procedure?) ? and (2) how do you set up this condition type in the config?
Thank you and hoping for your immediate feedback.
zccr

Hi,
You can use same pricing procedure
put 4 in subtotal in pricing procedure against the Discounr or freight cond
and in taxinn
BASb ALTCBV 362 and for jmop 363
But this will work only if same discount or freight value is in IV as that given in PO
if freing value changes in IV then its a problem
This is SAP bug, and SAP workes in that way only, freight value should be same in PO and IV
other solution
in taxinn create tax code like v8 vat 4% for 003 tax clasification
in ftxp create tax code V8 desc vat 4%
in fv11 for jvrd put 4
and at the time of IV put this tax code for freight amount
and for regular material value V1 tax code
this will work only if u have used acess seq MWST instead of JTAX pr JST1
hope this helps
Vipin

Excel, PowerView error in SharePoint 2013: "An error occurred while loading the model for the item or data source 'EntityDataSource'. Verify that the connection information is correct and that you have permissions to access the data source."

I've installed SQL Server 2012 SP1 + SP server 2012 + SSRS and PowerPivot add-in.
I also configured excel services correctly. Everything works fine but the powerview doesn't work!
While I open an excel workbook consist of a PowerView report an error occurs: "An error occurred while loading the model for the item or data source 'EntityDataSource'. Verify that the connection information is correct and that you have permissions
to access the data source."
error detail:
<detail><ErrorCode xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">rsCannotRetrieveModel</ErrorCode><HttpStatus xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">400</HttpStatus><Message xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">An
error occurred while loading the model for the item or data source 'EntityDataSource'. Verify that the connection information is correct and that you have permissions to access the data source.</Message><HelpLink xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=20476&EvtSrc=Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ErrorStrings&EvtID=rsCannotRetrieveModel&ProdName=Microsoft%20SQL%20Server%20Reporting%20Services&ProdVer=11.0.3128.0</HelpLink><ProductName
xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services</ProductName><ProductVersion xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">11.0.3128.0</ProductVersion><ProductLocaleId
xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">127</ProductLocaleId><OperatingSystem xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">OsIndependent</OperatingSystem><CountryLocaleId xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">1033</CountryLocaleId><MoreInformation
xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices"><Source>ReportingServicesLibrary</Source><Message msrs:ErrorCode="rsCannotRetrieveModel" msrs:HelpLink="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=20476&EvtSrc=Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ErrorStrings&EvtID=rsCannotRetrieveModel&ProdName=Microsoft%20SQL%20Server%20Reporting%20Services&ProdVer=11.0.3128.0"
xmlns:msrs="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">An error occurred while loading the model for the item or data source 'EntityDataSource'. Verify that the connection information is correct and that you have permissions to access the
data source.</Message><MoreInformation><Source>Microsoft.ReportingServices.ProcessingCore</Source><Message msrs:ErrorCode="rsErrorOpeningConnection" msrs:HelpLink="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=20476&EvtSrc=Microsoft.ReportingServices.Diagnostics.Utilities.ErrorStrings&EvtID=rsErrorOpeningConnection&ProdName=Microsoft%20SQL%20Server%20Reporting%20Services&ProdVer=11.0.3128.0"
xmlns:msrs="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices">Cannot create a connection to data source 'EntityDataSource'.</Message><MoreInformation><Source></Source><Message>For more information about this error navigate
to the report server on the local server machine, or enable remote errors</Message></MoreInformation></MoreInformation></MoreInformation><Warnings xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/sql/reportingservices" /></detail>
Please help me to solve this issue. I don't know if uploading the excel workbook is enough or maybe It needed to connect to another data source.
I Appreciate in advance.

Hi Ali.y,
Based on the current error message, the error can be related to the
Claims to Windows Token Service (C2WTS) and is an expected error under certain conditions. To verify the issue, please check the aspects below:
     1. The C2WTS Windows service and C2WTS SharePoint service are both running.
     2. Check the SQL Server Browser service is running on the machine that has the PowerPivot instance of SSAS.
     3. Check the domain. You're signing into SharePoint with a user account in some domain (call it Domain A). When Domain A is equal to Domain B which SharePoint server itself is located (they're the same domain), or Domain
A trusts Domain B.
In addition, the error may be caused by Kerberos authentication issue due to missing SPN. In order to make the Kerberos authentication work, you need to configure the Analysis Services to run under a domain account, and register the SPNs for the Analysis
Services server.
To create the SPN for the Analysis Services server that is running under a domain account, run the following commands at a command prompt:
• Setspn.exe -S MSOLAPSvc.3/Fully_Qualified_domainName OLAP_Service_Startup_Account
Note: Fully_Qualified_domainName is a placeholder for the FQDN.
• Setspn.exe -S MSOLAPSvc.3/serverHostName OLAP_Service_Startup_Account
For more information, please see:
How to configure SQL Reporting Services 2012 in SharePoint Server 2010 / 2013 for Kerberos authentication
Regards,
Heidi Duan
Heidi Duan
TechNet Community Support

Different Tax base in pricing procedure for a single sales order for different line item material.

Hi,
I have a scenario wherein in a sales order, for two different material, the tax base of pricing should get triggered on the basis of sold to party and the material entered at line item level.
Logic triggers on the basis of Region of Customer & a unique field in the Material Master but problem comes in the calculation of Tax base as the sequence of condition type (from – to) is already defined in the pricing procedure to pick from a particular step but in second line item the base is different i.e. the sequence of condition types that are maintained in pricing procedure should be different for Tax to calculate differently.
Kindly suggest if the same can be handled in a single pricing procedure and dynamically taking care of condition type sequence through Alt Cal Base Formula, so far I’ve tried both Alt Cal Formula & Base but it is not working
Client doesn’t want to go ahead by creating two different orders (through separate Pricing Procedure) for that. They want to have both materials in same order.
Kindly suggest a suitable way to handle this scenario.
Regards,
Aashika Agarwal

Hi,
Click on the ''check availability'' button at item overview and then click on ''One-time delivery'' on the top. This will ensure that you will have only one delivery for whatever quantity is confirmed on that date.
If you want to apply this rule for all orders across a sales area, then you can do the below configuration step :
SPRO->sales and distribution->basic functions->availability check with ATP logic->Define default settings-> Here in avail. checking rule select A (one time delivery). This will ensure that all orders created for a particular sales area will have only one delivery.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Palani

Pricing model for everyday newspaper

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for