Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

MartinS · 2015-01-04 04:16:41

I am implementing different pricing schemes. Say that one is for consumers and I am introducing a new one for certain business clients.

In this business scheme I have one item available: a digital download. This is priced at 0.00, because I invoice the client (in this case) on a monthly basis later, and the cart I see as a client-friendly way of choosing an image out of a gallery (we'll leave the client response gallery question for the time being for what it is, as I am awaiting a new release). The client chooses the image and orders it like any consumer; I get the order and the client gets the automatic confirmation of his order, and I upload the desired hi-res image to my server so the client can download it. Without charge until I invoice at a later date for this and other images, all in one go, but not too often, as the client doesn't want that.

But then the minimum order level in my other pricing scheme kicks in and warns the client that I have a minimum allowed order of 50.00 whilst his order costs 0.00. When I try to edit cart settings, I can see no mention of which pricing scheme I am editing, or whether I am editing all schemes at once. I am afraid of messing up what took quite a while to get to work as I want them.

Or is this a case where I should use "Edit Cart Settings" and create a new Cart ID under "Miscellaneous"? If I do that, will the existing settings in the default ttg_cart_01 remain unaltered and will I then be offered the choice of which cart I wish to edit whilst all other carts are safe from unwanted edits?

Sorry but I am at a loss to know what is the best way to have completely different prices, shipping, minimums etc for different sorts of clients who need treating in different ways.

rod barbee · 2015-01-04 04:40:44

Minimum order amount is part of the Cart setup, not the pricing scheme. So you'll have to change that in Settings.

Ben will have to address the topic of multiple cart installations.

(The only thing I can think of trying is to place another instance of ttg-be in another folder and install a cart there. Then enter the url to that cart in your galleries or gallery template. )

rod barbee · 2015-01-04 05:02:45

I actually just tried this on my test site:

-I created a second folder in the root. For lack of a better name I just named it "for-cart-2"

-In that folder I uploaded ttg-be and then uploaded cart to the ttg-be/ folder.

-I left everything at default settings for now.

-I then created a gallery and entered the url to the second cart's location

-I uploaded the gallery to the site's galleries/ folder and the cart appears to be working as expected.

-I also created an Album with Publisher using the same gallery as the template. The album has no problems connecting with the 2nd cart.

Ben · 2015-01-04 07:50:39

As Rod suggested, the most straightforward way of creating another instance would be to create another set of files above ttg-be, e.g.
set-one/
set-one/galleries
set-one/galleries/gallery-one
set-one/ttg-be
set-one/ttg-be/cart
...
set two/
set-two/galleries/
set-two/galleries/gallery-two/
set-two/ttg-be/
set-two/ttg-be/cart/
....

Then set the Cart ID to something unique for each.

MartinS · 2015-01-04 16:08:47

Thank you both for these practical, if at first sight somewhat heavy-handed, suggestions. By "heavy-handed", I mean that it seems a rather drastic solution to the little question of how not to set a minimum order level for certain (in my case very regular and faithful) clients. On the other hand I need to maintain a minimum order level for one-off consumer clients, otherwise they will happily order one 4x6"print today, another one tomorrow, etc.

I can see that this second instance of ttg-be could be the solution, although I cannot imagine that I am the only one who has differing client requirements. The galleries are already so wonderfully flexible and perhaps a future version of CE4 could offer a few more flexible options in its cart section? Such options might include different shipping costs for different clients, different minimum order levels and probably more I could come up with. I believe another user had mentioned a requirement for a different tax method; I too would certainly welcome extra tax flexibility in a future release so that purchasers can opt to see prices exclusive or inclusive of sales (or, here in Europe, "value added") tax. For instance, I am required by law to quote private individuals a price inclusive of tax: say, 10.00 per photo. But my charges to businesses and government bodies, for instance, are based on offers and quotations exclusive of sales tax at 21%, so those clients would be charged 10.00 plus 21% = 12.10 with the final amount ideally needing to be split, visibly, on their order confirmation as it will be later, on my invoice. Shipping charges and any other charges would need to be (able to be) quoted exclusive of tax too.

It just occurs to me that Ben's proposed solution might present me with a problem: there will be galleries that I would like all clients to have access to. Suppose, for instance, I have a gallery of local scenes which I want private consumers to have access to (for a canvas print on their wall) but which also will be interesting to local government or to a business, for a brochure or website. The one client may be charged 100.00 for private use; the other 200.00 for business use. This gallery may consist of hundreds, if not thousands, of stock images. It would be difficult to maintain the same gallery in set-one/galleries/ and in set-two/galleries/, I fear.

However, the very opportunity to discuss this sort of thing in this forum is great, and TTG has always been an ongoing project. I look forward to all new updates, major or minor, as things evolve.

rod barbee · 2015-01-04 16:27:59

it seems a rather drastic solution to the little question

little question to you perhaps, lots and lots of complicated coding for Ben
And probably a much more complex database.

there will be galleries that I would like all clients to have access to. Suppose, for instance, I have a gallery of local scenes which I want private consumers to have access to (for a canvas print on their wall) but which also will be interesting to local government or to a business, for a brochure or website. The one client may be charged 100.00 for private use; the other 200.00 for business use. This gallery may consist of hundreds, if not thousands, of stock images. It would be difficult to maintain the same gallery in set-one/galleries/ and in set-two/galleries/, I fear.

each gallery/album can connect to only one cart. The only way to do what you want is to set up a parallel gallery system, one for general public, one for business/government entities.

What you're proposing is a complete stock photography solution. All that I have seen are very, expensive. If this is the flexibility you need, you may consider looking into one of the online portals like Photoshelter

MartinS · 2015-01-04 19:14:35

Please don't think I underestimate the time and effort that goes into such programming. What I meant by my remark was that my apparently innocent "little" question would need such a rigorous re-organisation of folder structures to solve it; clearly the better solution is that Moses goes to the mountain, i.e. I find a work-around within CE4 to service those particular clients. CE4 is much too good a package to give up. Thanks again!

Ben · 2015-01-04 20:18:10

Hi Martin, the minimum pricing per order would be better tied to the pricing schemes. Something I'll add to my ever-long to-do list. Back-calculation of tax is fully coded and ready to go in the next cart update. See this thread: http://community.theturninggate.net/post/25180/#p25180

Your suggestions are all good, but some exceed the complexity of what the cart is likely to ever provide. I'd love the cart to grow in functionality and flexibility, but the interest in the cart and features so far have been dwarfed by the time and effort to develop them.

MartinS · 2015-01-04 20:51:43

That's brilliant, Ben: good news about back-calculation of tax. And as for pricing schemes, well, I am sure you have more pressing matters on your to-do list. I managed for years without the cart, but having tried it, I have found it to be a very useful administrative tool (even without online payments) for mailing and confirming orders to me and to the client. Its order history is also excellent.

Ben · 2017-05-23 21:43:25

An update a long time in the making. Minimum Order Amount has been shifted to the Pricing Schemes in my working code. This will be part of the next *Backlight* update, due in the next few weeks.

Community @ The Turning Gate

#1 2015-01-04 04:16:41

Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#2 2015-01-04 04:40:44

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#3 2015-01-04 05:02:45

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#4 2015-01-04 07:50:39

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#5 2015-01-04 16:08:47

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#6 2015-01-04 16:27:59

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#7 2015-01-04 19:14:35

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#8 2015-01-04 20:18:10

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#9 2015-01-04 20:51:43

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

#10 2017-05-23 21:43:25

Re: Different pricing schemes as opposed to different cart IDs

Board footer