15 month free trial with 400 transactions
| HelpRegister |
15 month free trial with 400 transactions Hi, The usual AccountSync subscription is for 12 month, with a transaction limit of 400. That's 33 1/3 transactions per month. Our club happened to sign up for AccountSync in October of last year, when the free trial was for 15 months. But the transaction limit was left at 400, the 12-month limit, instead of 500 (15 months x 33 1/3 per month). We have 20 members, and our monthly member payments are counted as transactions. So we have 300 transactions in 15 months that do not involve stocks. We will probably hit the 400 transaction limit earlier than 15 months, but have no reason to upgrade to Active Partnership. We would like to renew our subscription now, after 12 months, to straighten things out, but are having trouble figuring out who to contact in order to do that. If anybody else has run into this problem and found a solution, please let me know. Mike Carroll VistosoVIP mcarroll@pobox.com Have you ever considered making your payments quarterly or semi-annually? Our club did so several years ago and we changed from monthly to semi-annually, It makes it a lot easier for the treasurer, the position which I hold. Its also less trouble for the members, and I don't spend as much time chasing the delinquents. Arthur Klages, Treasurer Senior Investment Club LLC Greensboro NC -----Original Message----- From: club_cafe@bivio.com [mailto:club_cafe@bivio.com] On Behalf Of Michael Carroll Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 6:38 PM To: club_cafe@bivio.com Subject: club_cafe: 15 month free trial with 400 transactions Hi, The usual AccountSync subscription is for 12 month, with a transaction limit of 400. That's 33 1/3 transactions per month. Our club happened to sign up for AccountSync in October of last year, when the free trial was for 15 months. But the transaction limit was left at 400, the 12-month limit, instead of 500 (15 months x 33 1/3 per month). We have 20 members, and our monthly member payments are counted as transactions. So we have 300 transactions in 15 months that do not involve stocks. We will probably hit the 400 transaction limit earlier than 15 months, but have no reason to upgrade to Active Partnership. We would like to renew our subscription now, after 12 months, to straighten things out, but are having trouble figuring out who to contact in order to do that. If anybody else has run into this problem and found a solution, please let me know. Mike Carroll VistosoVIP mcarroll@pobox.com <<
Its also less trouble for the members, and I don't spend
as much time
chasing the delinquents. >> I don't know why any treasurer should have to chase
delinquents. If the members have to be forced to participate they shouldn't be
members.
Rip West Saint Paul, MN << The usual AccountSync subscription is for 12 month, with a transaction limit of 400. That's 33 1/3 transactions per month. >> The 400 transaction limit per annum is a complete surprise to me! Where on the bivio site is the "400" limit quoted? What constitutes a "transaction"? (Does each dividend represent 1/400 of our allowable total? Does a monthly payment by 20 members equal 20 transactions?) How do we find out how many transactions we have accumulated from the beginning of our subscription? And, what happens when we exceed the "400"? Unless I am looking in the wrong places, I find no specific mention of the "400 transaction limit". Bob Hooper New Pueblo Investment Club Tucson, AZ It should not be the treasurer's job to "chase delinquents". In my partnership we had late fees which I was duty bound to collect. It made accounting problematic (I'd have to track under and over payments as well as late fees in arrears) and they made me feel very uncomfortable to demand. And, how do you handle late fees when a partner consistently writes checks for the monthly contribution minimum but forgets to add in any late fees in arrears? I disagree with the concept of the fees from a philosophical perspective. In what way does a late contribution harm the partnership? The only one hurt by not contributing into the partnership's assets is the partner who fails to contribute. Well... I gave up chasing down late fees because I feel we're all adults and I'm not going to be the proactive partner to chase them down. If someone else felt that strongly about collecting them then they could do the dirty work. We ultimately decided to eliminate them. Partners know they have a monthly obligation and bivio's reports make it easy to see individuals' contribution histories. I now find my partners often don't realize they're caught up and make extra contributions. When they do, sometimes they just have me apply the extra contribution for the current month and sometimes they want me to credit the subsequent month. Not having late fees eliminates my need to track every payment, or amounts of excessive contributions which might be prepaid for subsequent months. John Munn Rip West wrote: > << Its also less trouble for the members, and I don't spend as much > time chasing the delinquents. >> > I don't know why any treasurer should have to chase delinquents. If > the members have to be forced to participate they shouldn't be members. Hi John,
<<
Not having late fees eliminates my need to track every
payment, or amounts of excessive contributions which might be prepaid for
subsequent months.
>>
I hope you didn't read my remark that treasurers shouldn't
have to 'chase delinquents' as my advocating late fees. I don't either approve
or disapprove of imposing late fees. I do disapprove of having to keep track of
whether members are current on their contributions. If a member misses a
contribution who is really hurt, other than the member in question. If a member
continually misses contributions, then the whole club is hurt, not by the lack
of those funds, but by the lack of participation by that member. In that case
the member should be asked to leave.
And I don't think think that treasurers should have to
'chase down' late fees either. If the club wants to impose them, just enter a
partial withdrawal in the amount of the fee, and then impose the fee. And why
worry about whether a payment is a make up payment, an extra payment, or
whatever. Just credit the member with it when you receive it.
My point is that members shouldn't have to be chased for
any reason. If they are a continual problem, get rid of them.
Rip West Saint Paul, MN Rip... I didn't read your earlier response as advocating late fees, but, I never thought of entering a partial withdrawal to cover a late fee. It's an approach that would surely get attention as it has year end tax implications that would be far more annoying than keeping contributions current. When we started, we had a graduated late fees which became more expensive with time. And the fees, while niggardly, were excessive in comparison to the delinquent contribution: $3 for one month, $5 for two months and removal from the partnership if 3 months past due on a $25 contribution. Back then, details of repayment were not adequately stated in our PA/BL, so the accounting treatment for repayment was ambiguous, confusing and worst of all, had the potential to be inconsistently applied. I think the best approach is to do away with late fees, expect monthly contributions, and if collecting contributions becomes a problem, ask the delinquent and problematic partner to leave. John Rip West wrote: > ...cut... > And I don't think think that treasurers should have to 'chase down' > late fees either. If the club wants to impose them, just enter a > partial withdrawal in the amount of the fee, and then impose the fee. > And why worry about whether a payment is a make up payment, an extra > payment, or whatever. Just credit the member with it when you receive it. > > My point is that members shouldn't have to be chased for any reason. > If they are a continual problem, get rid of them. John,
<<
I think the best approach is to do away with late fees,
expect monthly contributions, and if collecting contributions becomes a problem,
ask the delinquent and problematic partner to leave.
>> I have no problem with that.
<<
I didn't read your earlier response as advocating late
fees, but I never thought of entering a partial withdrawal to cover a late
fee. It's an approach that would surely get attention as it has year end
tax implications that would be far more annoying than keepingcontributions
current.
>> I don't see any annoying year-end
implications.
Rip West Saint Paul, MN Boy, there is nothing more annoying to me that a club member
who doesn't show up or pay on time. It never happens in our club because
prospective members know it's simply not acceptable. We have a
pre-orientation meeting that explains this. We also have an induction form
that lays out all the responsibilities and commitments we've discussed with
them. There is a clause that states "if a member misses 3 out of 12
meetings without prior consent from the majority of the partners, or if a
member's dues are more than 61 days late, the member's account is automatically
terminated." Then they have to sign it.
We are a money club. The point is to pool
money. I see late fees as an invitation...an alternative to paying on
time. It's akin to holding back a 13-year-old's weekly allowance for not
getting his/her duties done. Adults shouldn't have to be dealt with in
that manner.
Seriously, if you don't condone it, you won't have a problem
with it. I recommend to clubs having problems to construct a formal
proposal, ask the president to put it on the agenda, read the proposal, let
everyone take one to two minutes to go around the room and share their views,
then vote. Majority rules.
Lynn Ostrem, VP
In my letter, I mentioned that as treasurer , I had to "chase down delinquents." I actually overstated the problem. We have from 14 members, and it really wasn't that the members wouldn't pay. they would sometimes to mail in their checks when absent from the meeting. What I really meant to get across that paying semi-annually instead of monthly was easier all around. Since there were fewer checks to write, the forgetful members didn't have to be reminded as often. Also, the chore of making deposits was much less and cuts down greatly on the number of transactions With 14 members, semi annual dues save 140 transactions per year as compared to monthly dues paymentss As for late fees, our biggest problem was that we had luncheon meetings at a country club, and had to guarantee the number of diners, and when members didn't attend, the club still paid for the lunch. We were considering having the absent members pay for the lunch, but this really wasn't worth the effort, We now send an e-mail a few days before the meeting to determine who will be attending, and that has been working fine. Arthur Klages, Treas. Senior Investment Club -----Original Message----- From: club_cafe@bivio.com [mailto:club_cafe@bivio.com] On Behalf Of Rip West Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 1:05 AM To: The Club Cafe Subject: Re: club_cafe: 15 month free trial with 400 transactions << Its also less trouble for the members, and I don't spend as much time chasing the delinquents. >> I don't know why any treasurer should have to chase delinquents. If the members have to be forced to participate they shouldn't be members. Rip West Saint Paul, MN |
|
||||||