SLOPE Worksheet function

[bruceb \(omit\)]

There appears to be a difference in how Excel 2000 and
Excel 2003 handle blanks and zeros in the SLOPE
function. In 2000 if you start a string of data values,
say 12, and the Y values start with 3 blank cells, then
the function basically ignores the first 3 cells and
returns the slope of the line as if there were only 9
data points. This is good if the event you are
calculating really started in the fourth month and you
want a true trend based on the 9 values you have, but
want to have all of your formulas reflect a 12 month
year. However, Excel 2003 will include all of the cells
in the range identified and will assume zeros for those
blank cells. If you then save the file in Excel 2003, it
appears to be storing those values so that when you open
the same spreadsheet in Excel 2000, you get different
results than when that machine last viewed the file.
It appears to me that MS needs to add another arguement
to the Excel 2003 function that tells whether you want
leading blank cells to count in the slope calculation or
not.
This is a real problem, because I have created a very
complex business model, and now I have to NOT use certain
machines with it until I can fix all the formulas in next
years annual submission.
Anybody got any ideas, or does anybody even know how
one can bring this to MS's attention?

 

[Kent]

There could be a workaround to your slope question but
I'll address your second question with:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-
us;114491

Excel Support Technician
www.canhelpyou.com

 

[Jerry W. Lewis]

This was thoroughly dissected in this newsgroup back in December

http://groups.google.com/[email protected]

It also impacts INTERCEPT, FORECAST, and STYEX. MS is aware of the
problem and working on a solution

http://groups.google.com/[email protected]

Jerry