Moving to 5-digit receipt numbers

I’m planning to change DONATION to use 5-digit receipt numbers, so that for instance 2009 receipts will start at 2009-00001 rather than the current 2009-0001 (only 4 digits). This will allow larger organizations to use it without worrying that they might run out of receipt numbers, and allow me to stop saying that DONATION is most recommended for use by organizations with under 2,000 donors.

Of course, larger organizations may still want more fundraising features, and I will continue to say that.

My question is this: Do I need to provide an option to stay with 4-digit receipt numbers, for any organizations that think it will be disconcerting to their donors if they observe a change? Or should I just not worry about that, because really 00001 should be considered to be the same number as 0001?

11 thoughts on “Moving to 5-digit receipt numbers

  1. Hi Dan. Personally I would be innclined to stay where we are now. If an organization is large enough to be issuing 10,000 receipts or more they probably will be requiring more features than this program will deliver,
    unless you are planning on doing a lot of programming to accommodate these changes.

    Just my personal thoughts as anyhting I am involved in would never come close to requiring five digits for receipts.

    Blessings,

    Peter

  2. I take your point, Peter. But I have ocassionally had users say that they might need over 9,999 receipts per year, but still thought my program would work for them.

    Given this, and the fact that it’s a very easy programming change, it seems there’s no reason not to make the change. But that still leaves open the question of whether I need to give existing users an option to stick with the 4-digits.

    One thing I didn’t mention in the original post is that since I hate adding complications to the program, I might be a bit less likely to make this change if people do feel that I’d need to offer an option for 4 or 5 digits, since that would just be another potentially confusing configuration option.

  3. One of my advisors just sent the following reaction by email. I’m posting it so we can all see, to help see whether a consensus is developing:

    “I would suggest just moving to 5 digit number. The extra digit I do not think would make much difference other than allowing for the creating a larger number of receipts.”

  4. I see no problem with moving to 5 digit number Dan. It makes no difference to Revenue Canada and I can’t see any issue with us.

  5. I think just going to 5 digits covers all situations. We would not need this until sometime in 2012.

  6. We’re in the 21st century now so let’s move along with the extra 0. Before long, everyone will forget that we used to print the receipt number with only 4 digits.

  7. It won’t make any difference to recipients and most will probably not notice anyway. If you have clients who can use it, it makes sense to just change everyone.

  8. At this point, it seems like everyone is OK with this change to 5 digit receipt numbers, with no option being provided to keep using 4 digits instead.

    So, probably no more comments are needed, unless you disagree with this conclusion.

    Thanks, everyone, for your help with this!

Comments are closed.