PLS HLP Waterfall doesn't display properly

I am following various instructions for creating a waterfall.

I have supplier names in column A, Values in column B and an additional
column C that will "disappear". I have followed the formula for column C so
that it ends up with a 0 value in the last cell, then created a stacked
column chart.

My bars don't seem to float - they are at the bottom of the chart.

I have tried different ways of rearranging, but to no avail, although I have
been at this for many, many hours and maybe am just exhausted.

I would like my largest segment to appear from 0, then the next largest
value to appear "stacked" above and to the right of this one, and so on.
Then, at the far right of the chart, I would like a column that represents
the total.

I also would like the value, plus the % of the whole, to appear above (and
outside) of each column.

Is this possible?? I have seen it on a hard copy, but am unsure as to how
to create it.

Here is my data:

Supplier Spent Invisible
Supplier1 149 304
Supplier2 140 164
Supplier3 75 89
Supplier4 23 66
Supplier5 13 53
Supplier6 11 42
Supplier7 42 0
Total 453

I am under the gun time-wise and any help would be incredibly appreciated.
--
Thanks!

Dee

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:

My bars don't seem to float - they are at the bottom of the chart.

Here is my data:

Supplier Spent Invisible
Supplier1 149 304
Supplier2 140 164
Supplier3 75 89
Supplier4 23 66
Supplier5 13 53
Supplier6 11 42
Supplier7 42 0

Let your "Invisible" column be to the left of the "Spent" column, not to
the right. Also, if you're using the Chart Wizard, omit the "Supplier"
heading to give the wizard a clue where the x-axis column and label row
are (you can put it back after you've built the chart)

This waterfall starts from a maximum and declines toward zero. It looks
fine to me, but if that's not the way you want it, calculate the
cumulative invisible from 0 at the top to 411 at the bottom, instead of
304 at the top and 0 at the bottom.

Select the word "Invisible" in the legend and press delete to get rid of
it (or just delete the whole legend)

For labels, create a third, invisible column (this time to the right),
make the values be something constant like 25 or 50. Give it data labels
and format it to be invisible, so the data labels are sitting on top of
the waterfall bars. Then (because you're short on time to learn new
techniques, and there are only seven data points here) I suggest you
just *manually* edit those data labels to say what you want them to say.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.

Hi and thanks for your response.

I have a feeling I'm doing this all wrong. In fact, I started with just the
figures (no invisible column) and am scratching my head trying to figure out
how to actually create the formulas that correspond to what I want.

In fact, the figures that I wish to display are in the spent column.

I will try what you suggested. Thanks
--
Thanks!

Dee


"Del Cotter" wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:

My bars don't seem to float - they are at the bottom of the chart.

Here is my data:

Supplier Spent Invisible
Supplier1 149 304
Supplier2 140 164
Supplier3 75 89
Supplier4 23 66
Supplier5 13 53
Supplier6 11 42
Supplier7 42 0

Let your "Invisible" column be to the left of the "Spent" column, not to
the right. Also, if you're using the Chart Wizard, omit the "Supplier"
heading to give the wizard a clue where the x-axis column and label row
are (you can put it back after you've built the chart)

This waterfall starts from a maximum and declines toward zero. It looks
fine to me, but if that's not the way you want it, calculate the
cumulative invisible from 0 at the top to 411 at the bottom, instead of
304 at the top and 0 at the bottom.

Select the word "Invisible" in the legend and press delete to get rid of
it (or just delete the whole legend)

For labels, create a third, invisible column (this time to the right),
make the values be something constant like 25 or 50. Give it data labels
and format it to be invisible, so the data labels are sitting on top of
the waterfall bars. Then (because you're short on time to learn new
techniques, and there are only seven data points here) I suggest you
just *manually* edit those data labels to say what you want them to say.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.

This is what I have now, but am unsure how to populate the Invisible column;
Invisible Spent Percentage
Supplier 1 149 33%
Supplier 2 140 31%
Supplier 3 75 17%
Supplier 4 23 5%
Supplier 5 13 3%
Supplier 6 11 2%
Supplier 7 42 9%
Total 453 100%

Any help would be wonderful.
--
Thanks!

Dee


"Del Cotter" wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:

My bars don't seem to float - they are at the bottom of the chart.

Here is my data:

Supplier Spent Invisible
Supplier1 149 304
Supplier2 140 164
Supplier3 75 89
Supplier4 23 66
Supplier5 13 53
Supplier6 11 42
Supplier7 42 0

Let your "Invisible" column be to the left of the "Spent" column, not to
the right. Also, if you're using the Chart Wizard, omit the "Supplier"
heading to give the wizard a clue where the x-axis column and label row
are (you can put it back after you've built the chart)

This waterfall starts from a maximum and declines toward zero. It looks
fine to me, but if that's not the way you want it, calculate the
cumulative invisible from 0 at the top to 411 at the bottom, instead of
304 at the top and 0 at the bottom.

Select the word "Invisible" in the legend and press delete to get rid of
it (or just delete the whole legend)

For labels, create a third, invisible column (this time to the right),
make the values be something constant like 25 or 50. Give it data labels
and format it to be invisible, so the data labels are sitting on top of
the waterfall bars. Then (because you're short on time to learn new
techniques, and there are only seven data points here) I suggest you
just *manually* edit those data labels to say what you want them to say.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:

This is what I have now, but am unsure how to populate the Invisible column;

The numbers that you had before work fine (I tried them out) provided
you want the graph to start floating high at first, and gradually
descend to the floor. If you want the waterfall to start from the bottom
and pile up, you just need to do the same adding calculations the other
way around.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:
I have a feeling I'm doing this all wrong. In fact, I started with just the
figures (no invisible column) and am scratching my head trying to figure out
how to actually create the formulas that correspond to what I want.

In fact, the figures that I wish to display are in the spent column.

Yes, that's right, but in order to make them "float", you must have an
invisible column underneath them. In order for it to be underneath, if
you are using the Chart Wizard, you must place that column of numbers on
the left.

The figures you supplied at first will make a very good waterfall (I
tested it), if you put them the right way round.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.

Thanks so much for your help!
--
Thanks!

Dee


"Del Cotter" wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, in microsoft.public.excel.charting,
dee said:

This is what I have now, but am unsure how to populate the Invisible column;

The numbers that you had before work fine (I tried them out) provided
you want the graph to start floating high at first, and gradually
descend to the floor. If you want the waterfall to start from the bottom
and pile up, you just need to do the same adding calculations the other
way around.

--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to ,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.