u/SimulationBucket

Simply stated, I presented a solution in QB with three benefits.

1 Your Checking Register in Quickbooks will always match the bank’s register, without the problem of floating uncashed checks. You can figure out why that is beneficial.
2. You get to see your outstanding check amount in real time and if you’re good at it, you could see which checks they are.
3. Reconciliation is a one step breeze because your register matches the bank.

All you have to do is create a dedicated ZBA check writing account for writing the checks. When the checks come through at the bank and into your feed, you transfer that into the dedicated checking account to balance out that check. Some banks do this also for their own purposes.

A lot of people were worried that you are going to write a check and not realize how much money you really have because your main account matches the bank and does not include the floating checks. You can easily use a calculator to deduct the outstanding amount. I guess some people are still worried. But now I found a solution for that also!

All you have to do is make both the main checking account and the side checking account sub accounts of a master cash account. Now each register will just show what it is while the master account will show both together.

Simply stated, I presented a solution in QB with three benefits.

1 Your Checking Register in Quickbooks will always match the bank’s register, without the problem of floating uncashed checks. You can figure out why that is beneficial.
2. You get to see your outstanding check amount in real time and if you’re good at it, you could see which checks they are.
3. Reconciliation is a one step breeze because your register matches the bank.

All you have to do is create a dedicated ZBA check writing account for writing the checks, and when the checks come through at the bank and into your feed, you transfer that into the side, checking account to balance out that check. Some banks do this also for their own purposes.

A lot of people were worried that you are going to write a check and not realize how much money you really have because your main account matches the bank and does not include the floating checks. You can easily use a calculator to deduct the outstanding amount. I guess some people are still worried. But now I found a solution for that also!

All you have to do is make both the main checking account and the side checking account sub accounts of a master cash account. Now each register will just show what it is while the master account will show both together.

If you want to get serious work done in Excel, you need to make power files. These files are already formulated to do everything you need to do. All you need to do is plug in new data into to them and let the power files do the work every time.

You might have a power file that knows how to extract data from a field. I have one of those. Just plug in new skus into it and their descriptions.

You might have a power file that already has xlookup formulas. When you download a file and save it as the source, your power file will automatically do its work on it. I have some of those. If you don’t have power files, you are wasting a lot of time.

When you add macros to the mix, now your power goes exponential and I have those too.

Stop rebuilding the same crap all over again. Make power files. Dump data into them. Take an extra coffee break.

If you want to get serious work done in Excel, you need to make power files. These files are already formulated to do everything you need to do. All you need to do is plug in new data into to them and let the power files do the work every time.

You might have a power file that knows how to extract data from a field. I have one of those. Just plug in new skus into it and their descriptions.

You might have a power file that already has xlookup formulas. When you download a file and save it as the source, your power file will automatically do its work on it. I have some of those. If you don’t have power files, you are wasting a lot of time.

When you add macros to the mix, now your power goes exponential and I have those too.

Stop rebuilding the same crap all over again. Make power files. Dump data into them. Take an extra coffee break.

Let’s say you have a sheet with 1000 rows but 20 of them don’t belong there because you already dealt with them on a different sheet because you already uploaded them or whatever.

You can use xlookup to check which ones show up on the other page. I don’t know if this other method offers any real advantage over the xlookup, but if you’re uncomfortable with formulas or if you find this faster, let me know..

Copy the whole identity column from your other sheet. Just that one column. Paste it under the same column of your current sheet. Use conditional formatting to highlight duplicates. Sort by color. Remove or isolate what you don’t want.

This works particularly well if you just need to isolate the ones you want and copy and paste them somewhere else.

If this works for you, leave a comment.

Let’s say you have a sheet with 1000 rows but 20 of them don’t belong there because you already dealt with them on a different sheet because you already uploaded them or whatever.

You can use xlookup to check which ones show up on the other page. I don’t know if this other method offers any real advantage over the xlookup, but if you’re uncomfortable with formulas or if you find this faster, let me know..

Copy the whole identity column from your other sheet. Just that one column. Paste it under the same column of your current sheet. Use conditional formatting to highlight duplicates. Sort by color. Remove or isolate what you don’t want.

This works particularly well if you just need to isolate the ones you want and copy and paste them somewhere else.

If this works for you, leave a comment.

Let’s say you have to upload a certain daily line for a number of customers listed horizontally. You have those customers listed vertically on a different page. You also have it mapped onto the first line of the other page per customer.

So for example
B2 = other page B$2
B3 = other page C$2

But you need the page to advance one line per day. This is what you do.

You have a box say D1 where you put the number 0.
Then every day you change it to one more than the previous day.

Instead of B2 = other page B$2 you use the offset function:

B2 = offset(Source! B$2, D$1, 0)
B3 = offset(Source! C$2, D$1, 0)

As you increase D1, it keeps picking up the new line.

Please Join r/GetNoticedNow

Let’s say you have to upload a certain daily line for a number of customers listed horizontally. You have those customers listed vertically on a different page. You also have it mapped onto the first line of the other page per customer.

So for example
B2 = other page B$2
B3 = other page C$2

But you need the page to advance one line per day. This is what you do.

You have a box say D1 where you put the number 0.
Then every day you change it to one more than the previous day.

Instead of B2 = other page B$2 you use the offset function:

B2 = offset(Source! B$2, D$1, 0)
B3 = offset(Source! C$2, D$1, 0)

As you increase D1, it keeps picking up the new line.

If you want to do a few lines at once for a number of days:

First your customer list must repeat itself for each day. For the first repeat, put the number 1 someplace on that line for each customer, for example in column L. For every repeat increase that number by 1.

In your offset function, D$1 is now D$1 + L2

When you are done, don’t just add 1 to the offset for the next day. If you did 3 days at once, add 3. So if it previously said 1 and you did 3 days, it should be advanced to 4 for the next day.

If you enjoy these tips, maybe show some appreciation.

QuickBooks auto apply bug workaround

Quickbooks Transfer Tip

Quickbooks dedicated ZBA solution

Important update on dedicated ZBA solution

This workaround is a life saver. It is not something you really want to do but under the circumstances, it really is a lifesaver.

If you receive a large payment and spend an hour of work picking out the right invoices to pay, but then change the amount on top because of a typo or whatever, crazy QuickBooks will just reallocate your whole receiving to the top invoices and mess up an hour or more of work. It seems to have a mind of its own when it reallocates and when it doesn’t. I just noticed that it only seems to do it when you make the amount lower and not when you make the amount higher. But when it does reallocate, there is no way around it.

Turning off auto apply in settings has nothing to do with this. I was on the phone with them, and they had no solution whatsoever. This might not be an issue in QB desktop version. I don’t know because I don’t use it.

This is what you can do:

Save your work with the misaligned amounts. Don’t worry about it for now. Next, receive all the other invoices that are in the way. You could actually receive all open invoices but you don’t need to if you know how to just receive the ones that are getting in the way.

Next go back to your problem and redo the amounts as you wish because now when QuickBooks tries to redo it, it won’t do anything because there’s nothing else to get in the way. So now you can fix it without any problem. Then go back to that transaction where you received all those invoices and delete it. That’s it.

This workaround is a life saver. It is not something you really want to do but under the circumstances, it really is a lifesaver.

If you receive a large payment and spend an hour of work picking out the right invoices to pay, but then change the amount on top because of a typo or whatever, crazy QuickBooks will just reallocate your whole receiving to the top invoices and mess up an hour or more of work. It seems to have a mind of its own when it reallocates and when it doesn’t. I just noticed that it only seems to do it when you make the amount lower and not when you make the amount higher. But when it does reallocate, there is no way around it.

Turning off auto apply in settings has nothing to do with this. I was on the phone with them, and they had no solution whatsoever. This might not be an issue in QB desktop version. I don’t know because I don’t use it.

This is what you can do:

Save your work with the misaligned amounts. Don’t worry about it for now. Next, receive all the other invoices that are in the way. You could actually receive all open invoices but you don’t need to if you know how to just receive the ones that are getting in the way.

Next go back to your problem and redo the amounts as you wish because now when QuickBooks tries to redo it, it won’t do anything because there’s nothing else to get in the way. So now you can fix it without any problem. Then go back to that transaction where you received all those invoices and delete it. That’s it.

This workaround is a life saver. It is not something you really want to do but under the circumstances, it really is a lifesaver.

If you receive a large payment and spend an hour of work picking out the right invoices to pay, but then something changes in the amount because of a typo or whatever, crazy QuickBooks will just auto apply your whole receiving to the top invoices and mess up an hour or more of work. I can’t fully say when QuickBooks does the reconfiguration and when it doesn’t, but when it does, there is no way around it. I was on the phone with them, and they had no solution whatsoever.

So I came up with my own solution. This is what you do.

Save your work with the misaligned amounts. Don’t worry about it for now. Next, receive all the other invoices that are in the way. You could actually receive all open invoices but you don’t need to if you know how to just receive the ones that are getting in the way.

Next go back to your problem and redo the amounts as you wish because now when QuickBooks tries to redo it, it won’t do anything because there’s nothing else to get in the way. So now you can fix it without any problem. Then go back to that transaction where you received all those invoices and delete it. That’s it.

Based on my work on language, I developed a method of how we deal with things that don’t really exist like the magic of a magic trick or the optical illusion of the optical illusion or any type of thing where we conflate two things together, and they just don’t exist.

So first, we generally have two tokens, and those tokens are conflated together to make a kind of illusion that doesn’t actually exist. The way we stabilize that illusion and give it some performance weight is by letting the tokens be the bus carrier for the illusion. But at the end of the day, the illusion does not land in possibility. It rides on the tokens enough to make a performance, but ultimately, we have to realize that it doesn’t exist the way it was performed.

In order to use the tokens, those tokens have to be stable. So if we conflate a square circle, the tokens have to be half a square and half a circle, and then we conflate them to cause the mental illusion, which is the performance, which ultimately does not land in possibility. With a magic trick, it works a little differently. The reason why we have stable tokens in that case is because one of the tokens is ambiguous. Yes the girl is alive and yes, the magician cut through the box but that’s ambiguous enough to say that she was not cut. So that’s the stable part. Then we can conflate it to make a bit of magic which does not actually land.

I eventually show that there is a very unusual situation of this type that is different from all others because it uses only one token and not two. In this case, if we want to extend something further than it can exist, then we can only extend it with itself. This is the famous liars paradox. “This statement is not true” is the liars paradox. So we have “this statement is true.” And we want to extend it further outside itself to not true. The only way to extend it further is with itself to understand that a not true statement is itself type of true statement. So it is totally stable at that level.

The conflation happens because we want to dislodge that stability and we want to conflate what we want it to be false for itself and that conflates the actuality that it is actually a type of true. So that is how the conflation works.

I eventually show that God works with the same exact conflation. We want to go outside our reality and we can’t do that so the only way we could do that is by understanding that not our reality is an extension of our reality and that is totally stable. But we want to dislodge that to have God not finite for itself, and that conflates with the fact that it is actually finite since it’s within our reality.

So that is how it all works. This does not mean that I am saying that God does not exist in an atheistic sense. Quite the opposite. Atheists are putting on the same show like anybody else. We actually have no data outside ourselves not yes God not no God. So really we shouldn’t speak at all like many philosopher have said. But we want to speak and we are endowed to speak about these things so we speak in a conflated way but must realize that it does not pan out because if we actually pan it out, then God is a finite idol so we have to drop it. The silence doesn’t come in the beginning. It only comes at the end.

So when I say the conflation of God is not real, the point of that is to say that we actually have no data. It’s not to say another conflation that God doesn’t exist, but to say we have no data at all. So the conflation is actually meaningful in order to talk in the only way we can and then drop it for no data.

Based on my work on language, I developed a method of how we deal with things that don’t really exist like the magic of a magic trick or the optical illusion of the optical illusion or any type of thing where we conflate two things together, and they just don’t exist.

So first, we generally have two tokens, and those tokens are conflated together to make a kind of illusion that doesn’t actually exist. The way we stabilize that illusion and give it some performance weight is by letting the tokens be the bus carrier for the illusion. But at the end of the day, the illusion does not land in possibility. It rides on the tokens enough to make a performance, but ultimately, we have to realize that it doesn’t exist the way it was performed.

In order to use the tokens, those tokens have to be stable. So if we conflate a square circle, the tokens have to be half a square and half a circle, and then we conflate them to cause the mental illusion, which is the performance, which ultimately does not land in possibility. With a magic trick, it works a little differently. The reason why we have stable tokens in that case is because one of the tokens is ambiguous. Yes the girl is alive and yes, the magician cut through the box but that’s ambiguous enough to say that she was not cut. So that’s the stable part. Then we can conflate it to make a bit of magic which does not actually land.

I eventually show that there is a very unusual situation of this type that is different from all others because it uses only one token and not two. In this case, if we want to extend something further than it can exist, then we can only extend it with itself. This is the famous liars paradox. “This statement is not true” is the liars paradox. So we have “this statement is true.” And we want to extend it further outside itself to not true. The only way to extend it further is with itself to understand that a not true statement is itself type of true statement. So it is totally stable at that level.

The conflation happens because we want to dislodge that stability and we want to conflate what we want it to be false for itself and that conflates the actuality that it is actually a type of true. So that is how the conflation works.

I eventually show that God works with the same exact conflation. We want to go outside our reality and we can’t do that so the only way we could do that is by understanding that not our reality is an extension of our reality and that is totally stable. But we want to dislodge that to have God not finite for itself, and that conflates with the fact that it is actually finite since it’s within our reality.

So that is how it all works. This does not mean that I am saying that God does not exist in an atheistic sense. Quite the opposite. Atheists are putting on the same show like anybody else. We actually have no data outside ourselves not yes God not no God. So really we shouldn’t speak at all like many philosopher have said. But we want to speak and we are endowed to speak about these things so we speak in a conflated way but must realize that it does not pan out because if we actually pan it out, then God is a finite idol so we have to drop it. The silence doesn’t come in the beginning. It only comes at the end.

So when I say the conflation of God is not real, the point of that is to say that we actually have no data. It’s not to say another conflation that God doesn’t exist, but to say we have no data at all. So the conflation is actually meaningful in order to talk in the only way we can and then drop it for no data.

Based on my work on language, I developed a method of how we deal with things that don’t really exist like the magic of a magic trick or the optical illusion of the optical illusion or any type of thing where we conflate two things together, and they just don’t exist.

So first, we generally have two tokens, and those tokens are conflated together to make a kind of illusion that doesn’t actually exist. The way we stabilize that illusion and give it some performance weight is by letting the tokens be the bus carrier for the illusion. But at the end of the day, the illusion does not land in possibility. It rides on the tokens enough to make a performance, but ultimately, we have to realize that it doesn’t exist the way it was performed.

In order to use the tokens, those tokens have to be stable. So if we conflate a square circle, the tokens have to be half a square and half a circle, and then we conflate them to cause the mental illusion, which is the performance, which ultimately does not land in possibility. With a magic trick, it works a little differently. The reason why we have stable tokens in that case is because one of the tokens is ambiguous. Yes the girl is alive and yes, the magician cut through the box but that’s ambiguous enough to say that she was not cut. So that’s the stable part. Then we can conflate it to make a bit of magic which does not actually land.

I eventually show that there is a very unusual situation of this type that is different from all others because it uses only one token and not two. In this case, if we want to extend something further than it can exist, then we can only extend it with itself. This is the famous liars paradox. “This statement is not true” is the liars paradox. So we have “this statement is true.” And we want to extend it further outside itself to not true. The only way to extend it further is with itself to understand that a not true statement is itself type of true statement. So it is totally stable at that level.

The conflation happens because we want to dislodge that stability and we want to conflate what we want it to be false for itself and that conflates the actuality that it is actually a type of true. So that is how the conflation works.

I eventually show that God works with the same exact conflation. We want to go outside our reality and we can’t do that so the only way we could do that is by understanding that not our reality is an extension of our reality and that is totally stable. But we want to dislodge that to have God not finite for itself, and that conflates with the fact that it is actually finite since it’s within our reality.

So that is how it all works. This does not mean that I am saying that God does not exist in an atheistic sense. Quite the opposite. Atheists are putting on the same show like anybody else. We actually have no data outside ourselves not yes God not no God. So really we shouldn’t speak at all like many philosopher have said. But we want to speak and we are endowed to speak about these things so we speak in a conflated way but must realize that it does not pan out because if we actually pan it out, then God is a finite idol so we have to drop it. The silence doesn’t come in the beginning. It only comes at the end.

So when I say the conflation of God is not real, the point of that is to say that we actually have no data. It’s not to say another conflation that God doesn’t exist, but to say we have no data at all. So the conflation is actually meaningful in order to talk in the only way we can and then drop it for no data.

Transfers in and Transfers out can really trip people up. So remember this:

Asset accounts are intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have more money. When you transfer money out of them, you have less money.

Liability accounts are a little bit less intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have less debt. When you transfer money out of them, you have more debt. When you put money into them, you are paying off your debt. When you take money out of them, you are borrowing more.

Equity accounts are not intuitive at all. When you transfer money into them, you have less equity. When you transfer money out of them, you have more equity. When you put money into them, you are taking money out of your business and giving it to yourself. When you take money out of them, you are taking your own money and putting it into the business.

Transfers in and Transfers out can really trip people up. So remember this:

Asset accounts are intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have more money. When you transfer money out of them, you have less money.

Liability accounts are a little bit less intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have less debt. When you transfer money out of them, you have more debt. When you put money into them, you are paying off your debt. When you take money out of them, you are borrowing more.

Equity accounts are not intuitive at all. When you transfer money into them, you have less equity. When you transfer money out of them, you have more equity. When you put money into them, you are taking money out of your business and giving it to yourself. When you take money out of them, you are taking your own money and putting it into the business.

Transfers in and Transfers out can really trip people up. So remember this:

Asset accounts are intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have more money. When you transfer money out of them, you have less money.

Liability accounts are a little bit less intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have less debt. When you transfer money out of them, you have more debt. When you put money into them, you are paying off your debt. When you take money out of them, you are borrowing more.

Equity accounts are not intuitive at all. When you transfer money into them, you have less equity. When you transfer money out of them, you have more equity. When you put money into them, you are taking money out of your business and giving it to yourself. When you take money out of them, you are taking your own money and putting it into the business.

Transfers in and Transfers out can really trip people up. So remember this:

Asset accounts are intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have more money. When you transfer money out of them, you have less money.

Liability accounts are a little bit less intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have less debt. When you transfer money out of them, you have more debt. When you put money into them, you are paying off your debt. When you take money out of them, you are borrowing more.

Equity accounts are not intuitive at all. When you transfer money into them, you have less equity. When you transfer money out of them, you have more equity. When you put money into them, you are taking money out of your business and giving it to yourself. When you take money out of them, you are taking your own money and putting it into the business.

Transfers in and Transfers out can really trip people up. So remember this:

Asset accounts are intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have more money. When you transfer money out of them, you have less money.

Liability accounts are a little bit less intuitive. When you transfer money into them, you have less debt. When you transfer money out of them, you have more debt. When you put money into them, you are paying off your debt. When you take money out of them, you are borrowing more.

Equity accounts are not intuitive at all. When you transfer money into them, you have less equity. When you transfer money out of them, you have more equity. When you put money into them, you are taking money out of your business and giving it to yourself. When you take money out of them, you are taking your own money and putting it into the business.