Can Tresora reconcile takings to individual stores rather than to bank accounts?

Yes. A store is a dimension on the movement, not a bank account. Deposits, acquirer settlements and the store’s own daily report are matched to each other, and where an account serves several locations the engine places the movement from the reference, the expected amount and the date, keeping the evidence for the one it chose.

How are franchised locations handled, given they are not part of the group?

As counterparties. A franchisee is a company with a balance, an ageing and a credit position, so fees, royalties and supply are held against it and never mixed with the group’s own money. Owned locations sit inside legal entities, and movement between those is intercompany and gets netted instead.

We use several acquirers with different cut-offs. Does that need separate processes?

No. Each provider is a source with its own settlement calendar, its own report format and its own way of deducting. All of them reconcile in the same place, per provider and per settlement date, and a batch that arrives split across two days stays open until the rest of it lands.

How many movements a day does this handle?

The volumes a store network produces — thousands of small lines a day, spread across every account that collects them — are the normal case rather than the limit. What matters more is the tail: every line is placed or raised, and none is dropped for being small.

Can we tell what a single store contributed, including the franchised ones?

For an owned store, yes, from the reconciled movements themselves. For a franchised one, what is visible is the relationship — fees, royalties and supply invoiced and paid — because that store’s takings are the franchisee’s books rather than the brand’s. Saying otherwise would be reporting money the group never received.

Retail chains and franchise networks

The bank knows the account. It does not know the store.

Every location takes money, every bank account collects it, and a day is a long list of small movements. Every one of them has to reach a store before it can reach a company, and where the location is franchised it has to reach a counterparty as well. Tresora does that attribution on the whole day, never on the biggest lines only.

Request a demo

Statement lines · by store

Statement lines read

3,040

Aug 14

What they are

Store cash deposits 612	612	EUR +1,284,600.00
Card settlements from acquirers 27	27	EUR +3,960,400.00
Franchise fees and royalties 148	148	EUR +742,300.00
Supply invoices paid by franchisees 391	391	EUR +1,106,800.00
Store operating payments 1,744	1,744	EUR -2,318,500.00
Payroll 118	118	EUR -4,192,700.00

Net movement on the dayEUR +582,900.00

Store resolved: 2,986
Waiting for a decision: 54

One day of one country in the network, grouped over every line rather than the largest ones — the tail is where the store goes missing.

How a store network is built

Why can’t a bank account tell you what a store took?

Because the account is a container and the store is a fact about the business, and nothing in the file connects the two. Four things make that harder at scale.

Volume is the problem, not size: A thousand-euro deposit and a four-hundred-euro card credit are trivial on their own. Three thousand of them in a day, every day, is a workload no amount of care survives — and the errors are in the tail, not in the twenty lines anybody checks.
Money is pooled before it is identified: Carriers deposit several stores’ takings in one movement, acquirers settle several stores in one batch, and the reference that would tell them apart is a free-text field nobody ever agreed on.
Some of the network is not yours: An owned store sits inside a legal entity of the group, so its takings are the group’s own money. A franchised store belongs to somebody else, so a movement that looks identical in the file is a receivable with a name, an age and a credit limit behind it.
Every acquirer keeps its own clock: Cut-offs differ, settlement days differ and weekend handling differs, so one Friday of trading reaches the banks across three different value dates and never as one figure.

With 3 acquirers and a location behind every movement, the question is never whether a movement can be attributed. It is whether all of them can be, on the same day, without somebody having to open each one.

Attribution at volume

How does one line out of three thousand find its store?

By having more than one way to be sure, and by keeping what convinced it. No single field in a bank file identifies a store, so the engine weighs several and records which one decided.

The account it landed in: Some accounts serve one store and some serve a region. Where an account maps to a single location the movement is placed on that alone, and where it does not, the account narrows the field rather than answering.
The reference the payer wrote: Carrier deposit slips, acquirer batch references and franchisee remittance texts each carry a store or merchant identifier in their own format. Those formats are held per source and read as data rather than searched for as text.
The amount, and the day it should have arrived: A store’s own takings report says what it banked and when. A movement matching an expected deposit in amount and date is placed against it, and one that nearly matches is raised rather than forced.
Who the counterparty turns out to be: A payment from a franchisee is resolved to the company behind it, not to the name on the transfer, so fees, royalties and supply all land against one counterparty even when three different people typed three different things.

Every movement gets a store, a company and — where the location is franchised — a counterparty. The ones that cannot be placed with evidence are not guessed at: they go in front of somebody with what is known about them and what is missing.

The rules that do the placing are yours, held per source and per account, and changing one does not mean re-cutting a file. What the engine learns from a decision applies to the next movement of the same shape, and the decision keeps the evidence that produced it.

A movement is never spread across stores to make a total work. It reaches one location with the evidence for it, or it waits for a person — and what is waiting is on the screen rather than in a report nobody opens.

The day above, and the network it belongs to

Statement lines: 3,040; Read across the network in one day
Locations: 700; Owned and franchised together
Legal entities: 9; The owned locations sit inside these

Owned and franchised

Which of these movements is actually your money?

Two stores on the same street can look identical in a bank file and be two different things in the books. One is the group’s own cash. The other is a balance owed by a company the group does not own, and treating them alike turns money somebody owes you into money you look like you earned.

Counterparties · franchised locations

FRANCHISED

Owed by franchisees

EUR 9,537,900.00

Open at the date, across the franchised network

Supply invoices 161	161	EUR 6,482,500.00
Fees and royalties 148	148	EUR 2,140,800.00
Marketing fund 168	168	EUR 914,600.00

Past due by more than 30 days · 23 franchiseesEUR 612,400.00

486 franchised locations · 168 franchisee companies

214 locations are the group’s own and 486 are somebody else’s. The first set produces internal movement between companies the group controls. The second produces a counterparty relationship, with an invoice, an age and a credit decision behind every euro of it.

That is why the two are never added into one figure here. What the group owes itself is netted before anything moves externally; what a franchisee owes the brand is chased and aged like any other receivable — and the number of companies behind a balance is the number behind that balance, never the number of stores.

A franchisee that owes on supply often owes fees as well, so the three counts above overlap and are never summed. How many companies the network has is stated once, at the foot of the screen.

What changes on Monday

What does a retail treasury team do differently?

Four things, and none of them changes how a store banks its takings.

Takings are reconciled to the store: Deposits, card settlements and the store’s own daily report are matched against each other, so a short banking is a named difference on a named day rather than a variance found at month end.
The franchised half is a receivables book: Fees, royalties and supply are held per franchisee with their ageing, so the brand knows what it is owed and by whom before anybody runs a report.
Several acquirers, one reconciliation: Three settlement calendars stop being three processes. Each provider’s batches are matched where they land, and a Friday that arrives across three value dates is still one day of trading in the position.
The position goes down to the store: Ask the question at group, at country, at brand or at one address, and it is answered from the same reconciled movements rather than from four different extracts.

None of it asks a store manager to do anything differently, which is the only version of this that survives contact with a network this size.

Where to read further

The questions we get

What a store network asks before it moves

01Can Tresora reconcile takings to individual stores rather than to bank accounts?: Yes. A store is a dimension on the movement, not a bank account. Deposits, acquirer settlements and the store’s own daily report are matched to each other, and where an account serves several locations the engine places the movement from the reference, the expected amount and the date, keeping the evidence for the one it chose.
02How are franchised locations handled, given they are not part of the group?: As counterparties. A franchisee is a company with a balance, an ageing and a credit position, so fees, royalties and supply are held against it and never mixed with the group’s own money. Owned locations sit inside legal entities, and movement between those is intercompany and gets netted instead.
03We use several acquirers with different cut-offs. Does that need separate processes?: No. Each provider is a source with its own settlement calendar, its own report format and its own way of deducting. All of them reconcile in the same place, per provider and per settlement date, and a batch that arrives split across two days stays open until the rest of it lands.
04How many movements a day does this handle?: The volumes a store network produces — thousands of small lines a day, spread across every account that collects them — are the normal case rather than the limit. What matters more is the tail: every line is placed or raised, and none is dropped for being small.
05Can we tell what a single store contributed, including the franchised ones?: For an owned store, yes, from the reconciled movements themselves. For a franchised one, what is visible is the relationship — fees, royalties and supply invoiced and paid — because that store’s takings are the franchisee’s books rather than the brand’s. Saying otherwise would be reporting money the group never received.

Bring one week and one region.

A week of statements for a handful of stores, the acquirer reports behind them and whatever the stores themselves report as banked. We will run the attribution on your own movements and show you which ones it could place and which ones it could not.

Request a demo See every solution

The movements it could not place come back with what is known about each one and what is missing. Nothing is posted to your books that you have not approved.