A whole lot of the decision should be based on accounting needs. Payroll done internally? If so, is it important to have it done in the software, or can/will someone do it all by hand including all the local, state and federal filings. What about inventory for parts and finished goods? Does it need to be highly accurate and tracked in great detail for thousands or even millions of items? What about work in process inventory? These are all add-ons that can significantly increase the cost of a basic accounting package. If none of this is necessary, which sounds probable given the description, the freebie solutions might work just fine.
Also the bookkeeping / accounting skill of the folks involved should be considered. For dead simple bookkeeping that doesn't 'feel like' real accounting, Quickbooks is hard to beat. The checkbook metaphor is one most people get. If the relevant staff understand basic concepts such as double entry accounting and can accurately make journal entries when necessary something like Peachtree might be better. On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Ben Scott <mailvor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Jonathan Link <jonathan.l...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I know a SOHO who generates $300,000 annually in profit, so again, it's > all > > a matter of perspective. > > True enough. > > > You hadn't described budgetary requirements, except to say that > Quickbooks > > is "expensive." > > Good point. > > They don't really have a budget for this, except so say that they > have very modest needs and want value. In other words, keep things as > cheap as possible without sacrificing useful functionality. I think > that's a smart approach. > > (It's a small manufacturing company which was rescued from financial > collapse by the owner of my nominal employer. They have two or three > full-time employees, plus a part-time office worker. The GM is also > tasked from my employer. Guess where IT comes from. ;-) ) > > > However, accountants fees can quickly make the expense of > > of QB incidental. > > Unless the cost of the accountant is somehow proportional to the > cost of QuickBooks, I don't really see that as relevant. Paying a lot > for QuickBooks just because something else costs more is not good > business sense. > > Now, it may be that using QuickBooks would lower accountant fees, > since QuickBooks is the most common package. That's a good point, and > something that normally would be worth investigating. However, due to > the ownership situation described above, my employer is also loaning > our accounting staff. So accountant fees are zero. Unfortunately, we > can't use the ERP software my employer runs for this other company, so > I'm looking at other software. > > In any event, I've found that examining alternatives to "what > everyone else does" often pays off. The smaller the business, the > more nimble they can be, so this is an opportunity. If your stance is > "Just use QuickBooks", well, that's valid, but here I'm interested in > hearing about alternatives people have tried. :) > > -- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
