Answers.Body: <p>It would be nice if it worked as you have set it up but multiple terms are not compatible with auto-renew.</p>
  <p>The documentation for <a href="https://docs.civicrm.org/user/en/latest/membership/membership-price-sets/#multiple-membership-terms" rel="nofollow noreferrer">multiple membership terms</a> includes this caveat at the end:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>However you need to be aware that your members will not be able to auto-renew if you use this type of multi-term configuration.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-11-10T15:10:45.077Z
Answers.Text: Yes, found the sentence, too. Have also found the reason, see comment yesterday. Would be nice to have it, later on i'll dig in, hopefully. For now i use a workaround without price sets.
Answers.UserDisplayName: lbl
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-11-09T18:45:07.167Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-11-09T18:45:07.167Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Aidan
Body: <p>I want to provide a signin to a membership with CiviCRM contribution pages. I configured an auto-renew membership with a Membership Type Duration Unit = 1 month..</p>
  <p>Then i set up a price set. The price set is configured with different prices and terms, lets say</p>
  <ul>
  <li>quarterly with a number of terms = 3 for 30 €</li>
  <li>yearly with a number of terms = 12 für 100 €.</li>
  </ul>
  <p>Both is now included in a contribution page, with a payment processor and enabled membership section.</p>
  <p>When filling out the forms and submitting on the contribution page like <code>civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&amp;id=1</code>, the membership is recorded with the right terms (eq. 12 month), but the recurring contribution is recorded as monthly payment, eq. <code>100 € every month</code>, which is not right.</p>
  <p>On the confirmation page (before submitting the form) it also shows <code>I want to contribute this amount every month</code> instead of <code>every 12 month</code>.</p>
  <p>Papypal is used as payment processor, but i have also tried credit card.</p>
  <p>Is this expacted behaviour and did i misunderstood the price sets?</p>
  <p>thanks a lot, kindly regards</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-11-09T11:47:55.027Z
Comments.Text: I think you should have 2 membership types(quaterly and yearly) instead of 1. And set the duration unit to 3 months and 12 months. Choose both the membership types on the priceset and then let the users submit the membership page.
Comments.UserDisplayName: jitendra - fuzion
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-11-09T14:40:50.947Z
Comments.Text: @jitendra-fuzion good idea, i gave it a try and stuck both memberships in one priceset. It turns out that the duration unit (from membership) still getting through to recurring contributions, and now something else gets more clear: the recurring value is always from the first entry in the price set. Even if you select the second one, and even if the second line in price set belongs to the other membership type - the value written to recurring contribution is from line 1.
Comments.UserDisplayName: lbl
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-11-10T18:30:14.613Z
Comments.Text: that sounds like a bug if it can be replicated
Comments.UserDisplayName: petednz - fuzion
Tags: <civimember><price-sets>
Title: Using price sets for renewing memberships on online pages?
ThreadText: # Using price sets for renewing memberships on online pages?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-11-06)
  
  I want to provide a signin to a membership with CiviCRM contribution pages. I configured an auto-renew membership with a Membership Type Duration Unit = 1 month..
  
  Then i set up a price set. The price set is configured with different prices and terms, lets say
  
  * quarterly with a number of terms = 3 for 30 €
  * yearly with a number of terms = 12 für 100 €.
  
  Both is now included in a contribution page, with a payment processor and enabled membership section.
  
  When filling out the forms and submitting on the contribution page like `civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=1`, the membership is recorded with the right terms (eq. 12 month), but the recurring contribution is recorded as monthly payment, eq. `100 € every month`, which is not right.
  
  On the confirmation page (before submitting the form) it also shows `I want to contribute this amount every month` instead of `every 12 month`.
  
  Papypal is used as payment processor, but i have also tried credit card.
  
  Is this expacted behaviour and did i misunderstood the price sets?
  
  thanks a lot, kindly regards
  
  **Tags:** civimember, price-sets
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I think you should have 2 membership types(quaterly and yearly) instead of 1. And set the duration unit to 3 months and 12 months. Choose both the membership types on the priceset and then let the users submit the membership page.  
  > **username_0**: @jitendra-fuzion good idea, i gave it a try and stuck both memberships in one priceset. It turns out that the duration unit (from membership) still getting through to recurring contributions, and now something else gets more clear: the recurring value is always from the first entry in the price set. Even if you select the second one, and even if the second line in price set belongs to the other membership type - the value written to recurring contribution is from line 1.  
  > **username_2**: that sounds like a bug if it can be replicated  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2020-11-09. Score: 1
  
  It would be nice if it worked as you have set it up but multiple terms are not compatible with auto-renew.
  
  The documentation for [multiple membership terms](https://docs.civicrm.org/user/en/latest/membership/membership-price-sets/#multiple-membership-terms) includes this caveat at the end:
  
  > However you need to be aware that your members will not be able to auto-renew if you use this type of multi-term configuration.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Yes, found the sentence, too. Have also found the reason, see comment yesterday. Would be nice to have it, later on i'll dig in, hopefully. For now i use a workaround without price sets.  
  
  ---
  
  