Perhaps it does. Color me skeptical. Surely it's a story that helps close
the call though.

"Kindler Chase" <support[at]DeLeTeMe-ncubed-dot-com> wrote in message
news:O$rmfcFjHHA.3264[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Vadim Rapp wrote:
- quote -

I've not had the chance to talk with anyone other than the 2nd line of
support at Microsoft. What I can gather from MS support, entering a
Credit Card bill as a "Credit Card Payment" assists with Money's
reporting tools. And as Dick has been saying, it is still treated as a
Transfer.

Personally, I'm going to continue using the method of entering CC bills
as a CC Payment w/ a payee; I think that I'll have more accurate reports
(at least as far as what Money wants to show me) and I like the little
reminder it provides for me that I'm still "paying" a credit card

Thanks for the dialog in this thread. Definitely some good reading!

--

kindler chase
www.nCubed.com

There is an expense category in M05+ called "Credit Card Payments /
Transfers". It just serves to confuse when the "Special Categories"
"Transfer" and, arrggh, "Credit Card Payment" also exist and work much
differently. See my other post for more ranting on the subject.

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:%23EIC5uciHHA.4624[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I just tried this and cannot confirm that's how it works in M07. If you
specify "Just track the amount that I owe" and then enter a payment, it uses
Credit Card Payment:[name of account]. It also pops up the Autobalance
Wizard. It enters a Miscellaneous expense adjustment to square with the
statement balance you reported. But the balance gets reduced by a Credit
Card Payment:[name of account] special category transfer-like thing in the
source account / Transfer:[from account] special category in the target
account.

Perhaps you are confusing the "Credit Card Payment" and "Transfer" "Special
Categories" with the "Credit Card Payments / Transfers" Expense Category.
The latter is evil and only serves one purpose I accept: confusing users.

(The other purpose, I suspect, is for Essential Registers where real
Transfers are not supported, IIRC. Evil at any rate and, along with
Essential Registers, should be deleted/not used by any user who thinks they
are really trying to manage their finances with Money rather than just have
a glorified view of their banks' web sites. But that, obviously, is just my
opinion.)

"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:O5VCbGViHHA.4296[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

WRW> First, let me say that I am not arguing with you, I was merely
WRW> pointing out the technically correct way to handle this issue. You
WRW> are obviously familiar with Money and can figure this stuff out very
WRW> well. I agree that this point is not a big deal and that users can
WRW> choose the CC payment method without problems. For myself, I prefer
WRW> to use the correct terminology and I do admit that I am a little
WRW> (well, a lot) annoyed at the direction Money has taken since 2002 to
WRW> dumb down this excellent software.

Especially when there were so many opportunities. In fact, I think with
smart approach, Microsoft could make Money their main product, involving
into the orbit more and more aspects - since so many things in life are
money-related (or, more likely, so little not so). Look, we hear every day
how companies perform data mining, how they spy on customers, etc., etc., in
order to find out spending habits and make targeted offering. In Money, the
fullest possible information is already available, years of categorized
transactions. In right hands, this would be the weapon that would allow
Microsoft to offer absolutely unprecenented level of marketing, where Money
would actually offer the user the things he would actually want, basing on
the years of purchasing experience. And now look at the miserable ugly spam
that they have mastered.

WRW> I believe it is a mistake to lower our standards in any aspect of
WRW> life.

Been to a local Target/Kmart/whatever last X years?

WRW> Hand holding and making everything fast and easy is a trend that does
WRW> not encourage people to learn and improve. I cannot see that approach
WRW> as being useful to humanity.

Capitalist market can't offer anything but satisfying the demand. If
consumer wants fast and easy, then consumer will get it.

I think an important aspect, however, is changing the consumer. While many
countries design their immigration policy in order to filter in people with
higher education and cultural level (New Zealand for example), US is
practically doing just the opposite. The usual mantra for bringing in
millions of illiterate illegals is that they are doing the work Americans
don't want. I think much more important purpose is bringing in the consumer
that will be happy to buy all the Chinese junk. And then the new products
are geared towards the new majority - be it software, movies, school
education, electronics, or news on TV.

regards,
Vadim Rapp

Vadim,

First, let me say that I am not arguing with you, I was merely pointing out
the technically correct way to handle this issue. You are obviously
familiar with Money and can figure this stuff out very well. I agree that
this point is not a big deal and that users can choose the CC payment method
without problems. For myself, I prefer to use the correct terminology and I
do admit that I am a little (well, a lot) annoyed at the direction Money has
taken since 2002 to dumb down this excellent software.

I believe it is a mistake to lower our standards in any aspect of life.
Hand holding and making everything fast and easy is a trend that does not
encourage people to learn and improve. I cannot see that approach as being
useful to humanity.

When I tried M2005 or 2006 I remember seeing the CC payment category in
Money and Dick W and others in this forum have also stated that the CC
payment is labeled as a category. I don't remember specific details of my
trial back in 2005-6 but I do remember being surprised that Money developers
would make such a negative change in the program. The payment of a credit
card balance with a check from another account cannot be categorized! Its a
transfer. So any labeling which suggests that this item is a category is
incorrect.

I agree completely with your 3rd paragraph; that situation is an exception
to what I said above. If a user does not track CC transactions and only
pays the amount owed, then the payment of the bill is an expense and can be
categorized as a CC payment or something more descriptive. Obviously that
was not the assumption behind my posts. It also goes without saying that
anyone who fails to track CC transactions is missing valuable data [or,
maybe, they only use the credit card for very limited purposes and have very
few transactions.]

I did not suggest that Money developers were incompetent software makers -
just not reliable accounting or financial advisers. Also I was not picking
on the coders; I was, in fact, referring to the marketing wizards who seem
to control more and more of what goes into software these days.

Regards

Bill Wood



"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:O5VCbGViHHA.4296[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

WRW> I reply only because you misstated what I said. Transfer is the only
WRW> correct choice not because I think so or say so but because that is
WRW> the method adopted by the accounting profession based on a very long
WRW> history of professional practice.

As I understand, when the user is tracking individual transactions in the
account, credit card payment is equivalent to the transfer. It's not an
expense category, it's just another label for the transfer. If you open
dropdown list of categories, you will find credit card payment not under
expense group of categories, but under Special, next to Transfers - which,
as you can see, is also a category in Money terms - so where's the big
difference? and where did you get the idea you so much argue against that
credit card payment is expense category?

Such credit card payment, naturally, should not be included in the reports;
but even if it is, it shouldn't create a problem since it always occurs as
debit from checking account and credit to the credit card account, so the
balance is always zero.

However, as I understand, there's also another aspect. If the user chooses
to only track the amount owed on the credit card (in settings of the
account), then credit card payment indeed becomes an expense item. I never
used that mode, so I'm not sure how it works, but going by defnition, if you
don't see transactions, then your only expense is credit card payment.

WRW> As to the Money developers, I do not have access to them directly but
WRW> I do see their work product

As I understand, the negative things that you see are much more work of MSN
marketing people than developers. Developers, after all, code what they are
told to. If you read the famous blog "show me the money", you know that
under MSN, things like accuracy and functionality were not even 3rd
priority. It does not mean that they are incompetent.

Vadim Rapp

And that was BEFORE they added Credit Card Payments/Transfers as an EXPENSE
CATEGORY.

"Steve Roebuck" <steveroe[at]swbell.net.remove_this> wrote in message
news:OIivVIRiHHA.1624[at]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Thank you WW.

For years, it's been mis- understood by many users (without accounting
knowledge) that Credit Card Payments were not really payments, but transfers
of money from one account to another.

I bet we see this very same post at least quarterly in this newsgroup.

Maybe some people are paying credit card bills on purchases they made so
long ago that they forgot when the actual expense (category) took place.

In my opinion, Money dumbing down the interface has created even more
confusion.

I agree with you that the scheduled bills and cash flow analysis are the
most useful tools in the program.

Steve


"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:OEND0KQiHHA.4844[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Vadim,

I reply only because you misstated what I said. Transfer is the only
correct choice not because I think so or say so but because that is the
method adopted by the accounting profession based on a very long history of
professional practice.

The payment of a credit card balance with a check is a transfer of funds
between accounts - always was, always will be in fact and in formal
accounting terms. Money's new effort to label this transfer as a category
named CC payment is incorrect and flies in the face of fact, logic and
accounting practice. A transfer is not and cannot be treated as a category
under any circumstances because a transfer is neither income nor expense;
hence, calling a CC payment a category is simply wrong. I regard such
dumbing down tactics on Money's part as a silly mistake.

You may certainly choose to accept the Money for Dummies approach. Fine, I
don't object and I said so in my post, I am merely pointing out that the
correct method of accounting for the CC payment is to record it as a
transfer.

As to the Money developers, I do not have access to them directly but I do
see their work product because I have used Money every day for well over 20
years and I know it intimately. I have used every version of Money up to
M2002 (which is what I currently use) and I regard the core program as
originally conceived and implemented through 2002 as brilliant software. I
have tested the newer versions (M2003-M2006) side by side with M2002 for
periods up to several months and find them less brilliant as they get newer
and include more and more Money for Dummies type features. I also reject
the other new concept adopted my MSFT - auto timing out of downloading
privileges and refuse to "upgrade" because of that issue alone. So my
opinion about the accounting prowess of current Money developers is based
solely on facts that I see in the software - facts such as calling a
transfer a CC payment category. There are a number of accounting errors and
other major annoyances in Money as well and I repeat my former statement
that Money developers are not a source for accounting advice that I would
consider and I still say that they should be required to use their own
software.

If you want to use categories incorrectly (like CC payment instead of
transfers) or talk to Money developers about proper accounting practice,
good luck! On the other hand you might consider an Accounting 101 course at
your local community college where you will learn the correct methods.

Regards


Bill Wood




"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:exmwQWIiHHA.1456[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I really like this logic: "credit card payment is new and seems to me silly,
thus the only correct way for you is transfers. I never spoke to a single
Money developer, but common consensus is that they are idiots, so it must be
stupid to talk to them".

Actually, "logic" is quite an overstatement here.

Vadim


WRW> On the question of Transfer v CC Payment there is only one correct
WRW> choice - transfer.

WRW> As Dick W said neither is a category. A category can include only
WRW> income or expense and payment of a credit card is neither - it is a
WRW> transfer of funds from one account to another. Money never called
WRW> such transfers CC payments in older versions. The new (and silly)
WRW> term CC payment was inserted as part of MSFT's effort to dumb down
WRW> Money.

WRW> So if you want accuracy and consistency use transfers. If you don't
WRW> care, use both or CC payment instead. As Dick said both work and can
WRW> live together. A CC payment is a transfer internally, Money just
WRW> gives it that silly name so users do not have to think in accounting
WRW> terms.

WRW> As to speaking with Money developers? Most amusing! Money is filled
WRW> with butchered accounting and bugs which demonstrate conclusively that
WRW> Money developers are the last place I would ever go for accounting or
WRW> money management advice. I (and many others) have long said that
WRW> Money developers should be forced to use Money to manage their own
WRW> finances so they too would suffer the consequences of their poor
WRW> design and programming.

WRW> Overall, however, Money is great software and I use it every day and
WRW> love it. Of course I use M2002. After trying M2006, it went in the
WRW> trash!

WRW> Regards

WRW> Bill Wood

WRW> PS I always enter scheduled bills and deposits from the Bills and
WRW> Deposits schedule. I list every single source of income and expense
WRW> we have and it works beautifully. This is one of Money's most
WRW> powerful and useful planning tools. But Bills and Deposits is also
WRW> Money's greatest weakness. Adding, deleting and otherwise changing
WRW> bills and/or deposits seems to befuddle Money and can cause all sorts
WRW> of problems, the whole program can even go nuts over time. In M2002 I
WRW> have to clean up my file every 5 years or so by exporting all my
WRW> transactions and importing them back into a new file. In M2007 there
WRW> is a tool to clean up Bills and Deposits - I wish I had such a tool in
WRW> M2002.

WRW> "Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
WRW> news:uDBxGzvhHHA.4676[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
KC> > > When setting up a recurring payment, a Transfer will allow you to
??> > *not*
KC> > > associate a Payee w/ the transfer (which I do like because then my
KC> > > payee line show exactly where the money came from). Whereas, the CC
KC> > > Payment forces you to add a payee. Because of Money requiring a
KC> > > payee for recurring CC Payments, I'm starting to lean more towards
KC> > > the side of using CC Payments as it appears Money is wanting to do
KC> > > something with this classification and the associated payee.
??> ??> > Payment with payee also has another benefit: you can make it epay, so
it's
??> > not only reflected in Money, but is actually paid. Of course if you
??> > are enrolled etc.
??> KC> > > I have access to MS people (the developers) and contacted one of them
KC> > > today to see if they could put me in touch with their MS Money team
KC> > > to clarify this question. I'll be sure to post back when I hear what

??> > they
KC> > > have to say.
??> ??> > Please do, it would be interesting. Please also ask them how to
??> > restore Money's recognition of the payment as scheduled bill - the one
??> > you said you saw but then lost. I'd like to restore that as well.
??> ??> > Vadim Rapp
??>

On the question of Transfer v CC Payment there is only one correct choice -
transfer.

As Dick W said neither is a category. A category can include only income or
expense and payment of a credit card is neither - it is a transfer of funds
from one account to another. Money never called such transfers CC payments
in older versions. The new (and silly) term CC payment was inserted as part
of MSFT's effort to dumb down Money.

So if you want accuracy and consistency use transfers. If you don't care,
use both or CC payment instead. As Dick said both work and can live
together. A CC payment is a transfer internally, Money just gives it that
silly name so users do not have to think in accounting terms.

As to speaking with Money developers? Most amusing! Money is filled with
butchered accounting and bugs which demonstrate conclusively that Money
developers are the last place I would ever go for accounting or money
management advice. I (and many others) have long said that Money developers
should be forced to use Money to manage their own finances so they too would
suffer the consequences of their poor design and programming.

Overall, however, Money is great software and I use it every day and love
it. Of course I use M2002. After trying M2006, it went in the trash!


Regards

Bill Wood

PS I always enter scheduled bills and deposits from the Bills and Deposits
schedule. I list every single source of income and expense we have and it
works beautifully. This is one of Money's most powerful and useful planning
tools. But Bills and Deposits is also Money's greatest weakness. Adding,
deleting and otherwise changing bills and/or deposits seems to befuddle
Money and can cause all sorts of problems, the whole program can even go
nuts over time. In M2002 I have to clean up my file every 5 years or so by
exporting all my transactions and importing them back into a new file. In
M2007 there is a tool to clean up Bills and Deposits - I wish I had such a
tool in M2002.





"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:uDBxGzvhHHA.4676[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

KC> When setting up a recurring payment, a Transfer will allow you to *not*
KC> associate a Payee w/ the transfer (which I do like because then my
KC> payee line show exactly where the money came from). Whereas, the CC
KC> Payment forces you to add a payee. Because of Money requiring a payee
KC> for recurring CC Payments, I'm starting to lean more towards the side
KC> of using CC Payments as it appears Money is wanting to do something
KC> with this classification and the associated payee.

Payment with payee also has another benefit: you can make it epay, so it's
not only reflected in Money, but is actually paid. Of course if you are
enrolled etc.

KC> I have access to MS people (the developers) and contacted one of them
KC> today to see if they could put me in touch with their MS Money team to
KC> clarify this question. I'll be sure to post back when I hear what they
KC> have to say.

Please do, it would be interesting. Please also ask them how to restore
Money's recognition of the payment as scheduled bill - the one you said you
saw but then lost. I'd like to restore that as well.

Vadim Rapp

Vadim Rapp wrote:
- quote -

I'm sure I've seen this prompt in the previous years I used Money(think
back to M98). Tonight, I balanced a CC and then was prompted if I wanted
to Pay the CC. I did. But was never prompted to add this as a
scheduled payment.

When setting up a recurring payment, a Transfer will allow you to *not*
associate a Payee w/ the transfer (which I do like because then my payee
line show exactly where the money came from). Whereas, the CC Payment
forces you to add a payee. Because of Money requiring a payee for
recurring CC Payments, I'm starting to lean more towards the side of
using CC Payments as it appears Money is wanting to do something with
this classification and the associated payee.


- quote -

1/2 the fun of this (if you can call it fun ;o) ) is simply being as
consistent as possible with my categorization. I guess that's one reason
I rather hung up on the CC Payment v. Transfer.


- quote -

I have access to MS people (the developers) and contacted one of them
today to see if they could put me in touch with their MS Money team to
clarify this question. I'll be sure to post back when I hear what they
have to say.


--

kindler chase
www.nCubed.com

My view, from this pedant's corner:

Transfer/Credit Card Payment are not Categories. Special Category is the
least bad thing to call them.

Transfer is normative and normative beats "more precise" daily and twice on
Sunday. Especially when "more precise" is also a precisely meaningless
distinction. In my view, Credit Card Payment was added just to help people
that couldn't figure out why a credit card payment was a Transfer not a
Credit Card Payment.

That having been said, as noted earlier, I have a mixture of both in my data
and don't really care.

"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:eORNmfthHHA.4076[at]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
- quote -

KC> Vadim Rapp wrote:
KC> > > Question One: How should I set up the recurring payment in Money?
??> > Method
KC> > > One or Two? And any reason to choose one over the other?
??> ??> > I think the only difference may be this. When the next c.c. statement
??> > arrives, you balance the account and in the end schedule the payment
??> > from your checking account. At that point Money is supposed to ask "is
??> > this your scheduled bill payment?" - to which you say yes, so it then
??> > advances the next scheduled date. So I think there's better chance for
??> > this question if you specify the category as credit card payment. It's
??> > something you can verify. If it does not ask, you have to remember to
??> > go to Bills and "skip next occurence" manually.

KC> Fair enough. I'll give this a shot the next time I balance my CC
KC> account, re: delete any recurring payment, balance the CC account and
KC> then see if money wants to make my next payment a recurring payment.

I'm absolutely positive that Money does include the prompt "is this your
next scheduled payment?" , which would remove the necessity to manipulate
recurring payment manually. Also note that rather than delete and recreate
the whole recurring payment every time, I think it would be easier to "skip
next occurrence" of that payment.

KC> > > Question Two: Assuming I should set up the recurring payment as a
KC> > > "Transfer", should I go back and modify my previous entries that I
KC> > > used the category of "Credit Card Payment" to a "Transfer"?
??> ??> > Only if you are going to run reports by this category.

KC> From Dick's previous reply, it seems that the report will function
KC> either way? re: CC Payment or Transfer.

Yes, it's only about the consistency - to have them all belonging to the
same category.

From the pedant's point of view, the more accurate and less general the
description is, the better. Thus, "credit card payment" is probably more
precise category than transfer.

One more note: if you feel like it, you can always open free support
incident at support.microsoft.com. Most likely, the first response will be
from a brainless drone in India, but then you ask to escalate, and you may
receive a meaningful answer.

Vadim

In microsoft.public.money, Kindler Chase wrote:

- quote -

The SPECIAL Credit Card Payment category presents a shorter list
than Transfer when entered from the checking account.

Vadim Rapp wrote:
- quote -

Fair enough. I'll give this a shot the next time I balance my CC
account, re: delete any recurring payment, balance the CC account and
then see if money wants to make my next payment a recurring payment.


- quote -

From Dick's previous reply, it seems that the report will function
either way? re: CC Payment or Transfer.

Thank you for the reply, Vadim.


--

kindler chase
www.nCubed.com

Dick Watson wrote:
- quote -

Dick, thanks for your explanations. Hopefully someone can jump in that
can explain if the CC Payment option has some other purpose that's not
plainly obvious.


--

kindler chase
www.nCubed.com

Since Credit Card Payment is not an Expense Category, I think it is
generally affected in reports by the choices that include or exclude
Transfers. At least the two cases I just played with in reports in M07
worked this way.

"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]nospam.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:O1HhANjhHHA.3472[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -