Quicken 2007 Hierarchical Classes???

CharPatton

Hi:
Sorry if this is a dumb question since I am very new to the full-featured latest version of Quicken for Mac and am trying to learn it.

When one imports classes from Quicken 2007, does it support hierarchical levels?

The reason I ask is that I just did the import and my classes seem to have been moved to the tag fields, but I think I've lost levels/hierarchies. Instead of Class Header> Subheader1 and Class Header>Subheader2, it seems like I'm seeing just a list of Subheader1 and Subheader2.

Does this make sense? Am I doing something wrong?

Thank you very much!

jacobs

You are correct: classes became tags, and there is no hierarchy. However, unlike classes in Quicken 2007, you can have multiple tags on a transaction. so you can pretty much arrive at ways to do what you once did by creating reports that require whatever combination of tags you require.

For example, if you previously had…
   Class 1
      Sub-class A
      Sub-class B
   Class 2
      Sub-class A
      Sub-class B

…you could now just use the combination of Class 1 + Sub-class A,  or Class 2 + Sub-class B to get similar reporting. 

Depending on how you have your classes set up and named, you might find it easier to rename some of them back in Quicken 2007 and then re-import to Quicken Mac. 

jacobs

You are correct: classes became tags, and there is no hierarchy. However, unlike classes in Quicken 2007, you can have multiple tags on a transaction. so you can pretty much arrive at ways to do what you once did by creating reports that require whatever combination of tags you require.

For example, if you previously had…
   Class 1
      Sub-class A
      Sub-class B
   Class 2
      Sub-class A
      Sub-class B

…you could now just use the combination of Class 1 + Sub-class A,  or Class 2 + Sub-class B to get similar reporting. 

Depending on how you have your classes set up and named, you might find it easier to rename some of them back in Quicken 2007 and then re-import to Quicken Mac. 

CharPatton

Very pithy and useful explanation; thank you so much!!!