What advice would you offer to a Simple Fund Desktop user who is reluctant to migrate to Simple Fund 360?

Hello to all our Simple Fund 360 users! Happy Friday :grinning:

We’d love to asking you 1 quick question…

What advice would you offer to a Simple Fund Desktop user who is reluctant to migrate to Simple Fund 360?

Please let us know your answer/thoughts in the comments below! :point_down:

I have used Simple Fund since 1997. Back then BGL mailed the software in a series of 3 inch floppy disks. Then updates graduated to DVDs. After a few more years, the software was downloaded but the download time was an hour or more. Simple Fund 360 eliminates the chore of downloading and installing software updates. This alone would be enough reason to ditch the desktop version.

3 Likes

Hi tzcrozier

Reasons NOT to change: 1. feels very comfortable with known procedures. 2. Feels “on the web” won’t have the same intimate knowledge and control.

Reasons TO change: 1. With autoloading bank data and smart matching of transactions, there is much, much less work to do.
2. There is a map of the Desktop GL to the BGL 360 GL which makes it easy to understand the new account numbers.
3. BGL Support is super supportive in walking you through the migration process. Much simpler than the written description implies.
4. The screen forms are easier to use than Desktop - easier work flow.
5. The report system is much easier than Desktop. You can create report packs and download a pack as one file to send to accountant or whoever.

My 71 year old advice: Go for it.

Kind regards,
Rob.

3 Likes

The time you save alone is worth making the switch. We regret not doing it earlier!

3 Likes

BGL Desktop since 2006.

I have found absolutely no efficiency gains what so ever from SF360. In fact it was more efficient for us in desktop.

The Broker imports do not work as described with SF360 failing to match the majority leaving us to manually match them. Support went above and beyond to help but in the end they too could not get it to work. To top it off SF360 wouldn’t even allow auto coding to the broker clearing account (after all all we want the clearing account to end with is NIL) --> 6 or 7 hundred buys & sells we had to wade through it was horrifying.

I made a long list of problems in the other thread from BGL on what is holding you back from migrating the rest of the fund.

In BGL over the last 15years just about every one of our funds was 90-100% auto coded prior importing the Bank Transactions, following that we’d import the broker buys and sells with auto disposals leaving bugger all to do other than DRPs, EOY Tax component, check the Dividends agreed with the income data with the provided Div checker report, Trial Balance for anomalies & unit balances, and setup manual valuations for properties and other non-ASX/APIR assets.

EOY Tax components is hilarious, in all my years of entering them in Desktop I never once had any rounding issues, yet SF360 seems to always have rounding issues. So what I guess is the answer to that but when I enter something I expect to reconcile exactly any non-reconciled amount rings alarm bells in my head - maybe I’ve keyed something wrong, 1 or 2 or 3 cents could be the net result of a larger error.

My key take away from SF360 is that it requires the user to have total fail in it. :astonished: That is unlikely to happen for me any time soon, with some issues being explained away by support as ‘the back end was overloaded and thats why’ … it didn’t do this or that correctly.

We’ll be migrating the balance of our funds slowing.

Thank you for taking the time to provide constructive feedback. As Product Manager of Simple Fund Desktop for 11 years I am well aware of its strengths and weakness. The challenge remains to continue to improve Simple Fund 360 based on client feedback and improve some scenarios where clients may not feel the feature offers the same benefits. To your first point on matching, we have made several improvements to the Multi Match-Trade Algorithm that matches Buys and Sells to Banks Transactions. This was a full rewrite and took several months of testing to complete so would encourage you to retry your funds as the logic is much stronger than SF Desktop logic.

With regards to Tax Statements we are always looking to make improvements, the reason for rounding issues varies as to the provider of the data. The comparison to SF Desktop is fair as it was fast for manual entry, however as there is no data in SF Desktop for these distributions there will never be a rounding issue as the amount is posted to tax-exempt. Personally I am finding for the funds I am processing huge time savings, not having to do the calculations and manually enter data increases speed and accuracy. There is also now a review process built-in for accruals. Please let me know If there are specific Investments where you are seeing rounding issues
Would be happy to give you a call on any of the above, please DM me, Matt Crofts

I have been using it as a SMSF trustee for three years. I am an IT professional and I think it is amazing software. I do all of my own accounting and then send an online invitation to our auditor who accesses it all online. The bank feeds and corporate actions (DRPs etc) make it all so easy. You do not have to worry about backups, hard drive crashes or installing software updates. Cloud solutions are the future for most applications in most situations because of their ability to communicate with other online service providers (banks etc). Be brave and ride into the future!

1 Like

Thanks for replying .

In response to your response :wink: the Tax Statements, so far very few of them have actually had data already available in SF360 which means manual entry. This is the part that is quite infuriating, you’re requiring us to enter every single minuscule detail of the Tax Statement whether its relevant or not to the preparation of SMSF financials & tax returns.

Desktop provides 16 fields & rarely are you needing fill in more than 5 or 6…
Tax Components
The key thing here is, it does not ask for any other irreverent components for obvious reasons.

SF360 on the other hand…

SF360 is about efficiency, this is not efficient!

Surely someone could have come up with a far better solution than this. There is no reason why SF360 can’t be as efficient as Desktop while still keeping the per unit automation. It could easily be accomplished with a switch ON=Simplified (this one contains only the relevant fields {per Desktop} and OFF=Full (The current solution)

I’d wager that a simplified method would instantly become the preferred version. I strongly believe you’ll get far more people sharing their manually entered data with BGL than you do now, because by the end of filling all that in the frustration has reached a peak and I for one refuse to share because of it.