I always use a SQL SELECT before any report, which brings together any parent-child data needed, and applies any filtering condition specified in the report setup form. Avoids using the FOR clause in the REPORT command.

Until now I just did it because I liked the style. Now it seems like you've found that it's (one possible) necessary workaround for a bug in VFP 6.0.

Before replying, I tried your command in VFP6.0(SP1) with the FOR and RANGE clauses reversed (REPO ... FOR ... RANGE instead of REPO ... RANGE ... FOR) just to check, since there are a few commands where the order of keywords makes a difference. I got the same behavior you did either way. I also looked in online help for any cautions about using FOR and RANGE together. None. Seems like a bug in the REPORT command introduced in VFP 6.0.

Rich.