Can You Solve This Money Riddle?

[Vic Mackey 47847]

No, don't care if it has been posted and yes, it's dumb.

[Guest Lobo]

Depends on their margins on that $70 worth of goods.

[Guest]

store lost $30 straight cash homie and $70 retail of inventory. Some count inventory by retail dollars and some use what it cost them.  It just depends.  If it was a standard convenience store they lost about $40 on the merchandise and $30 opportunity for profit dollars.

Edited August 26, 2020 by slorch

[deadshank 24654]

E.) All of the above 

Edited August 26, 2020 by deadshank

[Steel Shank 9533]

What is 'tree-fiddy', Alex?

[futureman 22664]

definitely thread-worthy.  circumscribed. 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

The store lost 100 dollars. 

[futureman 22664]

9 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The store lost 100 dollars. 

Lolz

[Guest Lobo]

The store lost $10 and some envelopes?  /friday

Edited August 26, 2020 by Lobo

[SquishMitten 10493]

The store lost 100 dollars. 

But what they gained in life experience is priceless

[AUinHsv 583]

I was told there would be no math

Edited August 26, 2020 by AUinHsv

[Knoxtnhorn 6262]

Interesting.  I was just trying to explain the Monty Hall Paradox to a teacher earlier today. 

I'm probably missing something, but I'm guessing the store lost $70 in inventory and $30 in cash.  The only thing that left the story was the inventory and the change.  The $100 bill is still there regardless of what happened before or after.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

24 minutes ago, Knoxtnhorn said:

Interesting.  I was just trying to explain the Monty Hall Paradox to a teacher earlier today. 

I'm probably missing something, but I'm guessing the store lost $70 in inventory and $30 in cash.  The only thing that left the story was the inventory and the change.  The $100 bill is still there regardless of what happened before or after.

Nope.  The store lost $100.

It got the 100 back yes, but also gave 70 in goods out and the change, in return for the $100 that was taken from them.

Assuming the $100 had not been taken from the store, the 70 in goods and 30 in change would have been a normal transaction, with no loss involved.  So that's a wash.  Nothing changes about that except that the $100 was taken from them.

[Ignatius 4125]

Is this some fucking stupid trick question about how much literal ‘money’ (i.e. cash) the place lost vs how much value?

[NeverMarryAStripper 22241]

I don't know about the store, but I lost about a minute of my time

[Guest Lobo]

52 minutes ago, Knoxtnhorn said:

Interesting.  I was just trying to explain the Monty Hall Paradox to a teacher earlier today. 

I'm probably missing something, but I'm guessing the store lost $70 in inventory and $30 in cash.  The only thing that left the story was the inventory and the change.  The $100 bill is still there regardless of what happened before or after.

let me know how you explained it.  I tried to explain it a few times at McCombs classes, and I just don't go a good job at it.  they all eventually look it up and understand the math, I just wish I had a better way of explaining it.  It's not even important to your FIN class, it was just a good 10-minute break from our 75-minute lecture.  I feel like Gob Bluth where I explain it and then criss-cross my arms real fast and hope the "Illusion" pays off, but nothing.  Story of my life.  

[gyroprotagonist 2597]

i always looked at it being easier to explain (Monty Hall thing) with say 100 doors starting off.  Then eliminate 98 of them that don't have a car.  So you have the one you chose at the start or the other one.  You know that 1 of those remaining 2 have the car.  So are you going with your 1/100 shot or the other one that has a 99/100 shot?

shrink it back down to 3 doors and it's 1/3 vs 2/3 

[Gil Bang 26176]

I saw the subject  and saw who posted it, and was expecting something like:

So, I'm going out on a date.  Golden Corral charges 12.75 for all-you-can-eat, but Luby's only charges 9.50.  But Golden Corral is only 2 miles away, and Luby's is 12 miles away.  My car gets about 14 MPG with me alone in it, and my date weighs about 290.   Gas is 2.26/gal.  

So, is it more econom...never mind, my date is hungry NOW, so Golden Corral it is!

 

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Gil Bang

[Fat Bastard 650]

35 minutes ago, Lobo said:

let me know how you explained it.  I tried to explain it a few times at McCombs classes, and I just don't go a good job at it.  they all eventually look it up and understand the math, I just wish I had a better way of explaining it.  It's not even important to your FIN class, it was just a good 10-minute break from our 75-minute lecture.  I feel like Gob Bluth where I explain it and then criss-cross my arms real fast and hope the "Illusion" pays off, but nothing.  Story of my life.  

Did you at least take attendance when you tried explaining it?

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, but I had to send J'Quelin and A'aron down to principal O'Shaq Hennessey's Office.  

[Surly Bevo 25655]

 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

9 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, but I had to send J'Quelin and A'aron down to principal O'Shaq Hennessey's Office.  

When you choose one out of three, each door has a 1/3 chance of being right.  You choose one, that means 1/3 you are right and 2/3 you are wrong. When monte eliminates one door, the 2/3 stays with the remaining door. 
 

does anyone know if data from the show has been run to see how often the big prize is in the initial selection vs how often it’s in the remaining door?

Edited August 27, 2020 by Pato del Muerto

[Brothahorn 10096]

The store lost 100 dollars. 

$200

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nope.  The store lost $100.

It got the 100 back yes, but also gave 70 in goods out and the change, in return for the $100 that was taken from them.

Assuming the $100 had not been taken from the store, the 70 in goods and 30 in change would have been a normal transaction, with no loss involved.  So that's a wash.  Nothing changes about that except that the $100 was taken from them.

Now, if you don't want to assume that the store would have sold that inventory, that the goods wouldn't have been sold had the thief not stolen the 100, then it's out the cost of the $70 worth of goods plus the $30 bucks.

Or you could go with other assumptions, like it might not have sold the $70 of goods for $70 on another day, or it might have had a customer that paid $70 even instead of $100 or with four $20s.

It's not so much statistics as what kind of assumptions you make about it.

Edited August 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Doze 1323]

About tree fiddy loch ness monster.

[Knoxtnhorn 6262]

53 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

When you choose one out of three, each door has a 1/3 chance of being right.  You choose one, that means 1/3 you are right and 2/3 you are wrong. When monte eliminates one door, the 2/3 stays with the remaining door. 
 

does anyone know if data from the show has been run to see how often the big prize is in the initial selection vs how often it’s in the remaining door?

Not sure, but my Rainman-ish middle schooler immediately calculated that the odds of winning jump to 67% by switching before I even got to that part.

For giggles, we ran a simulation in which he was to randomly stay and randomly switch 20 times.  Staying with his original pick was successful 2 out of 10 times.  Switching 8 out of 10.  A little off 33 and 67, but still made the point. 

[Sam Lin 3591]

How do taxes work for retail stores? Is loss due to theft deductible against anything?

Does the store have insurance against theft? What is that deductible and monthly premium?

Is the store a front for laundering fake money? Was the $100 bill real or fake?

[Surly Bevo 25655]

Cashier lost a job for coming up short on the count.

[Prepuce of Doom 21260]

5 hours ago, futureman said:

definitely thread-worthy.  circumscribed. 

Now is the perfect time for you and @TrashMaster G to have a math-off to determine arithmetic superiority once and for all. 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Prepuce of Doom

[52-80 19379]

depends, am i doing GAAP or non-GAAP accounting?

[El Diablo 4232]

Thought it was going to be about 3 guys renting a $30 whore that turned out to only cost $25. 

[Doc Reeves 6434]

I’ve always been taught it’s not how much you paid, but any and all reasonable potential revenue from the product, say if the products value is connected to the market (made with gold or supply is very low because of demand at Christmas)

the store is out the cash in the register, the inventory and the profit margin for the inventory. Depending, the store is out at least $100 possibly more if we factor in an employee discount.

Edited August 27, 2020 by Doc Reeves

[miguelito 11449]

is it muledick?

[RollLeft 5088]

Does the store use fifo or lifo?   Are we including sales tax?  Does the retail place use a store supplier with buyback credits?

[Jerry Callo 8952]

$100 was stolen.  That's it.  The second transaction is a red herring that doesn't change the answer.  Someone paying with a $100 bill for $70 worth of merchandise and getting $30 in return is a normal transaction with the expected result.

[Llano Estacado 1257]

The second transaction is a red herring

Maybe you shop at WholeFoods, but you’re over paying for your herring.

[Wally Fairway 5664]

1 hour ago, miguelito said:

is it muledick?

close but your a not correct
it's dickbutt

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

1 hour ago, Llano Estacado said:

 

Maybe you shop at WholeFoods, but you’re over paying for your herring.

 

If you need one that can chop down the mightiest tree in a forest, you have to pay for quality. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, Jerry Callo said:

$100 was stolen.  That's it.  The second transaction is a red herring that doesn't change the answer.  Someone paying with a $100 bill for $70 worth of merchandise and getting $30 in return is a normal transaction with the expected result.

As stated above, that's my thinking.

However, you can alter that by changing some assumptions, outlined above.

[Jerry Callo 8952]

10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As stated above, that's my thinking.

However, you can alter that by changing some assumptions, outlined above.

Ah, I didn't read all of the responses.  Your first response is correct.  The second one with changing all the assumptions is just gibberish, IMHO.

 

14 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Now, if you don't want to assume that the store would have sold that inventory, that the goods wouldn't have been sold had the thief not stolen the 100, then it's out the cost of the $70 worth of goods plus the $30 bucks.

In this case, the store is out the stolen $100, but benefited by the amount of margins it had in goods that wouldn't otherwise been sold.  

[TwiceHorn 31987]

2 minutes ago, Jerry Callo said:

Ah, I didn't read all of the responses.  Your first response is correct.  The second one with changing all the assumptions is just gibberish, IMHO.

 

In this case, the store is out the stolen $100, but benefited by the amount of margins it had in goods that wouldn't otherwise been sold.  

You can make the whole thing gibberish by changing up assumptions.

But yeah, you're right, in that scenario, need to add back the profit.

['stache 22117]

Jesus Christ. Money is fungible. It doesn't matter even a little bit that it was the "same" $100 bill, or the same person, or any person, or whether any sales were made thereafter, or if it was the highest volume selling day of the year, or if the thief wiped his ass with it first. The store lost $100 dollars. The fact that college graduates are arguing over profit margins, inventory, and taxes, is pretty astonishing.

Edited August 27, 2020 by 'stache

[MonkeyDoughnut 10762]

I counted the money in the drawer, we're short $100

[Sbbruin 22082]

They lost stacks on stacks on stacks.

[Covri 6366]

What about the butterfinger?

 

[Incredulity 11861]

Son, you got a panty on your head...