Suggested by Tiberian Nagy – New
During a reduction period, master planning considers sales orders that have been delivered or invoiced in the past, but it does not take into account forecast lines that lie in the past. This leads to incorrect demand calculations during the reduction period. The following example illustrates this issue more clearly:
The forecast period is set to one month, while the reduction period is configured to three months. If the forecast for the first month lies in the past, the forecasted demand for that month is no longer considered in the planning. However, sales orders that previously reduced this forecast are still active in the second month and now reduce the forecast of that month — as if the forecast for the first month had never existed.
In my opinion, forecast lines in the past that still fall within the reduction period should be considered for reduction.