Just look at everyone's balance books: Punk : + $21(a pair of shoes) + $29 (changes) = $50 Neighbor: even (out $50 in the beginning which the store owner settled with him later) Store owner: -$15 ( shoe cost) - $29(changes) - $6 ( would-be-profit ) = -$50 or -$44 (excluding the would-be-profit , which is actual money out of his pocket)
Do basketball players need to know more complicated maths than this: a basketball inside the three-point line is worth 2 points and a basket outside the three-point line is worth 3 points?
YAO IS RACIST Why would he bring a shoes crime math question to test basketball players, knowing that most shoes crimes are committed by black youths? There was a teacher that got fired for phrasing a math question in terms of crack cocaine to inner city kids.
he lost $50 to the fake dollar bill and he gained $6 profit for selling a pair of shoes 50-6=44 he lost $44
Well, let see...... + $50 (from neighbor) + $6 (from profit of shoe) - $50 (pay back to neighbor) - $29 (change gave back to customer) - $21 (cost of shoe, $ 15 + $6) ---------------------- net amount: -$44 I gotta say, I thought it was $94 the very sec after reading, but if i were to translate the stuff out to mathematic term, it became pretty obvious.
Holy cow, tooo funy. Has everyone realized by now that the answer is $44. The fact that rocket player/staff got the answer right with bad math (100 - 66) is halarious!!
We got MJ by giving up JHo, After Minn found the fake, JHo went to Dallas so Yao can dunk on someone in this Dallas team. This is acutually a double win for Les. But if MJ turns out to be the fake, Les is then really screwed.
this is what I thought originally but it's wrong, the lender gives him $50 in real change so he is left with 21$ after the sale, and he has to repay the $50, so lost this 29$ + the 15$ for the shoe = $44.
Turn out there were so many cons out there. Les got screwed in another deal and took another fake product Juwan. Les took the advice from Deke this time and found a way to cut loss and use Juwan to trade for a gem called Mike (not the shoe shop owner) from the Wolves clan. Now the million dollar question: Did Les get screwed again this time?
He is out the -15$ cost of shoes. He is out the -29$ in change given the customer to customer. The 50 dollars is the trick, they are a wash. -29$ + -15$ = -44$
Why your guys did so much trouble on the calculation? Well, on first second (probably I even did not think) I gave the answer $50 because the owner loss this money due to fake .... After five seconds, then I realized that $44 could be the right answer too if you did not include profit that your should own for the loss. However, I still prefer to $50 than $44 for the answer.
even the passion assassin debate was better than this thread. owner lost $29 for the change. also $15 for the cost of the shoes. that's all he lost, plus some wounded pride.
I do not think anyone discussed this: 100-56=44. not the 66. The owner lost 100: 50 to the scamer, 50 to the fake money. Thw owner gained 56, 50 from the fake money, and 6 from the profit. So 50+50-(50+6)= 44.
Nice work, pryuen. I just heard something but am not sure if it's true. It's said Mr. Meng Wang writes those Rox and Yao stuff without actually interviewing Yao or even being in Houston. I think people can ask Yao to clear this.
First off this is an accounting question, not a mathmatical problem. In accounting, in and out has to balance. That's the key. Depending on whether the 50 is fake, either the cutomer or the neighbor gains $50，and the owner pays for it, minus the $6 profit, owner loses $44. While I agree with the $44 answer, some of the logic I see here is flawed.
