Deep dive
Multi-location: one administration with cost objects vs multiple administrations
The choice between one Exact Online administration with locations as cost objects, or multiple administrations per BV, determines how you set up AP.
Many hospitality chains use a holding BV with operational BVs per location — fiscally and legally logical, but for accounting it means multiple Exact Online administrations with separate suppliers, VAT returns, and ledgers. For every invoice you must determine which BV (administration) it belongs to. For some suppliers (Sligro with separate location numbers, or Heineken with separate hospitality numbers) that's clear; for others (general suppliers, marketing, IT) it must be configured via delivery addresses, email routes, or history.
Other chains — especially smaller ones, or franchises with central bookkeeping — use one Exact Online administration and treat each location as a cost object. Administratively simpler but requires sharp coding: every invoice line must get the correct cost object (location), or the food cost ratio per location won't reconcile. VAT returns happen centrally too, so the split between beverage and food VAT must be exact.
Glimps supports both models. For multi-administration, Glimps uses our multi-entity solution with central inbox and automatic per-administration routing, with approval per the right BV's matrix. For one administration with cost objects, every invoice line is automatically classified by delivery address, supplier category, and usage patterns. In both models, the finance manager sees the same dashboard: status, food cost, and pour cost per location.
In practice, chains from 5+ locations often choose multi-administration because fiscal and operational autonomy per BV is easier to manage. Under 5 locations, or franchise models with central finance, one administration with cost objects often works fine. The choice is fiscal-legal, not software-driven — Glimps adapts.