Unable to add APE to Security listing

kaoscoach
kaoscoach Member ✭✭
edited October 3 in Investing (Windows)
Quicken is able to find it when you search for it but it doesn't let you actually add it.

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/APE

Comments

  • kaoscoach
    kaoscoach Member ✭✭
    Looks like the problem is that APE has the same security name in Quicken as AMC. Both are named, "AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc". APE is a new spin off so it should have a different name. How long does it take for Quicken to correct this so that both can be listed and used?
  • Jim_Harman
    Jim_Harman SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    I did some experimenting and apparently if you add a security with a name that matches a security that is already in your security list, the new one will replace the old. It appears that "matches" is "unique in the first 20 or so characters".

    If I add AMC then go to the Security Detail view and rename it AMC Class A, Quicken will let me add APE as a separate security. You might want to rename that to AMC Preferred or whatever, just so you can tell which is which.

    Please try that and let us know if it fixes the problem for you. 
    QWin Premier subscription
  • kaoscoach
    kaoscoach Member ✭✭
    I already did that and was able to add APE. Hence, my follow up to my own question. My follow up question however is when does Quicken fix this? Users can't be expected to "rename" securities just to be able to add them? The ticker symbols are unique but if Quicken is relying on the names of the securities to also be unique, it sounds like to me they should ensure they are unique in the first place? Especially when "querying" for them and Quicken presents you with it?
  • kaoscoach
    kaoscoach Member ✭✭
    I have a hard time considering that the solution for adding two separate securities with two unique tickers (APE and AMC) to be added to Quicken is to add one and and then go back and rename it. What is the point of having different tickers if the name also has to be unique? As I said, if the name has to also be unique, it seems that Quicken should be the one ensuring that since they are not the same security. The fact that they have separate tickers proves that. The ticker symbol should be the unique (primary) key, not the "name" of the security.
  • Jim_Harman
    Jim_Harman SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    This is an issue that Quicken will need to resolve with their 3rd party quote provider.

    Unfortunately, reporting a problem here will not generally trigger any action by Quicken. I suggest you and anyone else with this problem report the issue using the Help > Report a Problem link and also contact Quicken Support directly. Be sure the support agent understands the problem and gives you a ticket number for future reference.

    You will not get a response if you only use Report a problem, Quicken uses the Report a Problem submissions for statistical purposes and to help diagnose the issue.


    QWin Premier subscription
  • kaoscoach
    kaoscoach Member ✭✭
    The quote provider and Quicken should only care that AMC and APE are unique, not "AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc". If they are focusing on that field as well, their database is not optimized or done correctly.

    For example, I can assure you, that you are not the only Jim Harman in the world. However, you should be the only one with your unique email/username.
  • Jim_Harman
    Jim_Harman SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    There may be a similar issue with GSK, which also had a recent spin-off.

    See this discussion
    https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7918380/some-high-low-prices-and-volumes-not-updating-properly-e-g-gsk
    QWin Premier subscription
  • sircody01
    sircody01 Member ✭✭
    I don't have anything to add, other than I'm having the same issue. I totally agree with the statement:

    "I have a hard time considering that the solution for adding two separate securities with two unique tickers (APE and AMC) to be added to Quicken is to add one and and then go back and rename it."

    That's just a temporary band aid, not a true fix.
  • Michael Farley
    Michael Farley Member ✭✭✭
    I was able to add APE with the name changes suggested above, but trying to figure out what the original price is baffling.  It was supposed to be half of what AMC closed at on 8/19 ($18.02/2), but the opening price on 8/20 was $6.95 for APE.  Any ideas?  
  • sircody01
    sircody01 Member ✭✭
    > @"Michael Farley" said:
    > I was able to add APE with the name changes suggested above, but trying to figure out what the original price is baffling.  It was supposed to be half of what AMC closed at on 8/19 ($18.02/2), but the opening price on 8/20 was $6.95 for APE.  Any ideas?  

    First let me preface by saying I'm not a CPA or tax advisor. Having said that, my understanding is that if you received your APE as a dividend for having AMC, then for tax purposes you need to enter a cost basis of $0. The opening price on 8/20 is irrelevant for accounting & tax purposes.
  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    kaoscoach said:
    The quote provider and Quicken should only care that AMC and APE are unique, not "AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc". If they are focusing on that field as well, their database is not optimized or done correctly.
    ...
    Quicken's database structure requires that the security NAME be unique for each security in the file.  There is no requirement that a security have a ticker symbol or be matched to an online brokerage-identified security with a CUSIP number.  Quicken has to care that the names are unique as that is the primary interface to the user. 

    The shortcoming in this regard is that Quicken fails to prompt or otherwise notify the user that a security newly being created has a name already in use.  The program should (IMO) notify the user of that circumstance and offer the user a corrective path (change one name or the other). 

    I don't know that Quicken has much control if any over the security names provided by the security lookup data source.  (I'd assume that is the same as the quote provider, but I have no knowledge on that point.)
This discussion has been closed.