Templates did not update w/new price

Dug a little further.

When I look at other items in our LUM template, the Vendor Agreement Reference is the BULK agreement and the price that defaults is somehow being calculated and defaulting from the bulk price.

So, instead of the LUM price defaulting when selecting the LUM template in RQC, I'm getting the BULK price divided by how many eaches in the bulk UOM.

I would now imagine that a price exception is going to happen when we EDI to GHX.

Hi Bev, what does the UOM tab on the IC11 form look like for this item?

Hey MK,
  See attached....

2 vendors agreements? Are they both for BX or BX and EA? Now how about the PO13's? Is there a Price UOM or is it blank on both records?

If you have multiple agreements set up for the same item and participants are wide open the system will simply choose the best price by default. If you add 1 BX of item 35795 to a req using the LUM template what does the cost source show when you drill on the req line?

MK and Jon,
  See attached, which I think answers both of your questions.

The item type shows "Inventoried" and the cost source shows "Entered" and the cost being pulled is the same as the vendor direct agreement ($481.02 divided by 6). That tells me this item is set as inventory tracked in IC12 at the From Location set on the template line and that there is no stock on hand and not cost information stored at that item location. Because there's no cost at the item location the system pulls the lowest agreement pricing as long as the From Location on the template line is a participant. Can you post the IC12 Main tab for this item at the From Location on the template line and the drill showing inventory balances and cost information?

On a side not about inventory tracked items and cost- in the past we've had an issue with cost information disappearing when stock was depleted to zero. If there was no stock on hand we would get a "cost required" error when ordering that item. This would be a big problem when orders were placed through MSCM and the error would hold up the entire req. This seems to have been resolved in our last MSP upgrade. But having no cost information can also mean that no quantity was ever put into stock at that location.

Hi Jon,
  There would be no inventory balances for LUM items as they are not perpetual inventory.

I see where the IC12 Inventory Tracking flag was set to Y. I deleted this IC12 record and changed the From Loc in the template to HOSP.

Price that's pulling in RQC is still incorrect. It's the bulk price/6.

I just did a comparison on another item that is housed on our LUM Template in PO15. I patterned the item whose price is not defaulting correctly in RQC (35795) after a LUM item whose price IS defaulting correctly in RQC.

The difference is this. On the item defaulting correctly:
The Source Vendor is our LUM account with O&M
NO vendor agreement reference
Cost Source = Last Cost
Cost Option - Cost Required

On the item NOT defaulting correctly (35795)

The Source Vendor is Maquet Medical Systems USA. (I believe it should be the same as the other item)
Vendor agreement reference - MAQUET MEDICAL SYST PRICING
Cost Source = Contract
Cost Option - Cost Required

Bev, I think there is a connection between the PO13 records and what you are seeing. But, in my test system I only see an EA price in RQC when my PO25 and PO13 have EA specified for the item. What we see in your system is the PO25 that is driving your price is a BX price divided by the conversion factor of 6. Would you mind sending screenshots of all the PO13 records for item 35795?