Solve this simple math problem (you may not get it right :D)

[bonethugz]

is it 180?

you 80, got a 100. pay another 100. used 100.

when do we get the correct answer?

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lini actual loss: $90 (actual expense) + $10 (lost profit margin) = $100

This, I believe, is the correct answer.

 

[zachary80]

Unless the buyer intended to use a real $100 and now the seller can never buy then sell another pair of those headphones, I don't see how the profit margin is a loss

And if you are talking economic profit rather than accounting profit (which you never said) the whole thing is a mess

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kees $100. Everybody got his moneys worth of change or phones. Execept you. You paid for the fake $100. So you're down $100.

I think this is the correct analysis.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS I think this is the correct analysis.

This is an incorrect analysis, doesn't make any sense

 

[ColdFireArow]

NVM

 

[sonicm]

Let me take a miseducated stab at this..
You Have: 80
Buy headphones: -80

Have: 0
Profit: 0


Buyer Gives you: +100
You Have: 100
You give to neighbor:-100
You have: 0
Neighbor gives you: +100

You have: 100
Profit: +20


You give buyer: -10

You have: 90
Profit: +10


You give to neighbor: -100

You have: -10
Profit: -90


A loss of $90, but
-10 in the red AMIRITE?
But seeing as no one else got that I'm sure I did some mistake somewhere in there, I don't know, I'm really sleepy right now...

 

[hYdrociTy]

Got it!

What did you lose? headphones and 10 dollar change to him

What did he gain? Headphones + 10 Dollars

BUT that 10 dollars you lost goes even with the 10 profit you charged
so

You lose = $80 headphones.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hYdrociTy Got it! What did you lose? headphones and 10 dollar change to him What did he gain? Headphones + 10 Dollars BUT that 10 dollars you lost goes even with the 10 profit you charged so You lose = $80 headphones.

what profit?

did you profit at all?

 

[hYdrociTy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert what profit? did you profit at all?

Yes, before the whole scandle..

Oh wait you have to pay the neighbor
I meant 170 at first but then again where did that extra 100 bucks come from.. so its actually less than 100 because the guy only got away with 90 bucks. 80 headphones + 10 change whille you have the other 10 change and lost the headphones but have to pay 100

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert This is an incorrect analysis, doesn't make any sense

Sure it does, but it's perhaps a semantical issue, since we both get to the same number. But you could look at it this way. Your wallet is empty. The buyer gives you $100 for the phones. You change that $100, and you give him $10 back. You are left temporarily with $90 funds in your wallet. Also, temporarily, you have a profit of $10 (which is part of the $90). But then you have to pay the store $100 bill to replace the counterfeit. So you borrow $100 to pay back the store. That leaves you with $90 of bad money in your pocket, which is worthless. You throw it in the trash can. You also now have a debt of $100. You are out $100 because you had to replace the $100 that the store changed for you.

EDIT. Woops, this is wrong. I forgot you have a good $90 in your wallet left over from the store making change, minus the $10 given to the buyer. So you're really not out $100 in cash. But you don't have the phones any longer, and some loss has to be attributed to that. But what value should be attributed to the lost phones is not really answered by the hypothetical, I don't think.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS Sure it does, but it's perhaps a semantical issue, since we both get to the same number. But you could look at it this way. Your wallet is empty. The buyer gives you $100 for the phones. You change that $100, and you give him $10 back. You are left temporarily with $90 funds in your wallet. Also, temporarily, you have a profit of $10 (which is part of the $90). But then you have to pay the store $100 bill to replace the counterfeit. So you borrow $100 to pay back the store. That leaves you with $90 of bad money in your pocket, which is worthless. You throw it in the trash can. You also now have a debt of $100. You are out $100 because you had to replace the $100 that the store changed for you. P.S. This assumes that when you ask how much you are in the "red," you do not count the cost of the phones initially.

If you are an individual, the answer would be $90.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert If you are an individual, the answer would be $90.

Why does it make a difference whether it's an individual or not?

 

[hYdrociTy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS Why does it make a difference whether it's an individual or not?

How are you not an individual if you have to run to the "neighbor" store to get change? Either you're not or that "store" of your is awfully ghetto...I still say either 80 dollar headphones if you are optimistic or 170 if you are pessimistic. You lose 80 not 90 because that 10 bucks magically appears..

 

[sonicm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS Sure it does, but it's perhaps a semantical issue, since we both get to the same number. But you could look at it this way. Your wallet is empty. The buyer gives you $100 for the phones. You change that $100, and you give him $10 back. You are left temporarily with $90 funds in your wallet. Also, temporarily, you have a profit of $10 (which is part of the $90). But then you have to pay the store $100 bill to replace the counterfeit. So you borrow $100 to pay back the store. That leaves you with $90 of bad money in your pocket, which is worthless. You throw it in the trash can. You also now have a debt of $100. You are out $100 because you had to replace the $100 that the store changed for you. P.S. This assumes that when you ask how much you are in the "red," you do not count the cost of the phones initially, or the value. In other words, it assumes that by in the "red," you mean monetarily. If the buyer has skedaddled, you are also out the value of the phones. But the hypthetical does not provide any information on the value. If one assumes the value is what was paid by the buyer, i.e., then you are also out the $90 value for the phones.

Throw away the bad money? Why is it 'bad'? Your paying the neighbor back makes it legal.