Had a brief play with it the other day. It's a world apart from what I'm used to (VT) but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Was also impressed with the TB.csv import from Clear Books as VT can't handle that (or at least I don't think it can).
It's the wrong time of yr to be giving it any serious thought though but perhaps others are more efficient so have the time?
Price point wise, it's obviously more expensive than VT so wonder how that might sit with the client base it's likely targeting. Some big TB's can be a bloody pain to import manually so it MIGHT be worth it for that alone.
Good to see though, look forward to giving it a proper run-out come Feb.
Replies (8)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Keying in a TB is a doddle with VT
Now if you used Sage, or CCH, you would spend more time looking for the nominal code than actually keying data until you had memorised them all, as the search functions were equally useless.
Thought about it
I thought about it until I realised it was more expensive than VT. VT does exactly what I need and is easy-peasy. No point for me to change.
Maybe not ...
Anyone who has never used VT may be attracted by the integration and look no further.
Anyone who has used VT will know how quick it is (even without integration), and the feed from VTT+ & VT cashbook is so very useful.
VTT+
For importing TBs etc, I would probably use VTT+ to get the import then link that to Final Accounts in the usual way. VTT+ could have matching codes to Clear Books, so you can see the mapping. yes, an extra stage, but easier to track what has gone where.
As to OP - BTC have kindly given a longer trial period and AP probably is a good addition to their offering. I won't change from VT at the moment though. Plus I think BTC still have work to do on their core tax products. They have added lots of bells and whistles but haven't improved the tax return elements sufficiently e.g. if the standing data had additional fields for childrens names and DOB's then SA could alert for the High Income Child Benefit charge. Or warn of incorrectly claiming Class 4 exemption for 65 year olds. Income that is joint with spouse - e.g. rents and savings interest, auto allocated. Neater reporting for clients of SA return summaries.
As the letter writers to newspapers say, I could go on....
Not yet
We don't use VT, so as Shirley says that price comparison isn't an issue, as the integration might be of more interest. Our current product costs more, and we've had a number of issues recently, mostly around what should be the simple area of roundings.
The "extended" trial period is a bit of an illusion as I wouldn't be looking at the product before 31 January in any event.
My main concern would be the fact that partnerships and LLPs will "follow soon." I've been around long enough to know that "soon" is a highly flexible term, and basically I won't buy on the strength of vapourware. I have no wish to keep our current software just to deal with those.
Ease of use
Been playing around with it for a few days and created first set of accounts.
Seem a little more complicated that the simple VT but I like idea having all info and data under one program.
From past experience with BTC I know the software will be constantly improved.
Yes more expensive than VT but in long run the integration with other parts of the software I think will outweigh the cost.
Waiting for a call from support as few issues not yet fixed.
One thing that I do not like and sounds a bit long winded is if the company had a previous accounting period, you in affect have to create a template for previous year in BTC, save it and mark it complete before you can start current year and to input comparisions.
Dont know why cant be simple like VT
Well I have taken the plunge and subscribed...Fingers crossed it be easy...
BTC Accounts Software
Reading all your comments.....I took the plunge and am wondering if I did the right thing.....I was VT user...very simple and easy. BTC's offering is much more complicated....very structured.
The advantage of BTC is having everything in one place and the integration however it's taken me a week to produce a single set of accounts which on VT would have taken me about 45 minutes. I'm guessing there is a learning process here but I'm seriously hoping that it's gets better otherwise it's going in the bin.