Detailed Fee Report

Dan,

Off the top of my head, I would say custom is the way to go.  But maybe someone else out there has other ideas.  On the other hand, something that I am sure has occurred to you already is that reporting on fees as they pertain to a specific performance could be misleading unless some things are taken into account.  For example, the fact that a per order fee of $5 for an order containing performance A is not the same as the $5 per order fee for an order containing performances B and C.

Now, you could certainly create a custom fee report which would count up the number of tickets and divide by the number of tickets to say $2.50 to B and $2.50 to C.  Then of course you get the fun of what happens when someone buys one ticket to A, B and C, since dividing by 3 creates a penny problem.  Not to mention, that road leads to just ugly numbers anyway.  Additionally, you still potentially have the issue of someone adding a ticket to an existing order later, potentially after performance A has already passed, except that by adding tickets to the order, you changed the value of that fee specific to the performance seeing as there is no new fee on the order, but it now applies to both performances A and D.

Lastly, you could decide instead that if one order contains both performances A and B, that the $5 per order fee applies to both performances.  Which is fine if you are reporting on them individually.  But, if you decide to sum up your fees for both of those performances, you are going to be looking for $5 in your bank account that never was actually there.

All that to say, we decided to separate our fee reporting from performances and look at them on their own.  It took some shifting of mindsets, but otherwise, we are now good to go with our current reporting.  Best of luck!

John

Dan,

Off the top of my head, I would say custom is the way to go.  But maybe someone else out there has other ideas.  On the other hand, something that I am sure has occurred to you already is that reporting on fees as they pertain to a specific performance could be misleading unless some things are taken into account.  For example, the fact that a per order fee of $5 for an order containing performance A is not the same as the $5 per order fee for an order containing performances B and C.

Now, you could certainly create a custom fee report which would count up the number of tickets and divide by the number of tickets to say $2.50 to B and $2.50 to C.  Then of course you get the fun of what happens when someone buys one ticket to A, B and C, since dividing by 3 creates a penny problem.  Not to mention, that road leads to just ugly numbers anyway.  Additionally, you still potentially have the issue of someone adding a ticket to an existing order later, potentially after performance A has already passed, except that by adding tickets to the order, you changed the value of that fee specific to the performance seeing as there is no new fee on the order, but it now applies to both performances A and D.

Lastly, you could decide instead that if one order contains both performances A and B, that the $5 per order fee applies to both performances.  Which is fine if you are reporting on them individually.  But, if you decide to sum up your fees for both of those performances, you are going to be looking for $5 in your bank account that never was actually there.

All that to say, we decided to separate our fee reporting from performances and look at them on their own.  It took some shifting of mindsets, but otherwise, we are now good to go with our current reporting.  Best of luck!

John