Question

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Fri Nov 28, 08 3:35 pm

3 MEN GO INTO A HOTEL. THE MAN BEHIND THE DESK SAID THE ROOM IS £30.00.

SO EACH MAN PAID £10.00 AND WENT TO THE ROOM.

A WHILE LATER THE MAN BEHIND THE DESK REALIZED THE ROOM WAS ONLY £25.00 SO HE SENT THE BELLBOY TO THE 3 GUYS' ROOM WITH £5.00 change.

ON THE WAY THE BELLBOY COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPLIT £5.00 EVENLY BETWEEN 3 MEN, SO HE GAVE EACH MAN A £1.00 AND KEPT THE OTHER £2.00 FOR HIMSELF.

THIS MEANT THAT THE 3 MEN EACH PAID £9.00 FOR THE ROOM, WHICH IS A TOTAL OF £27.00.
ADD THE £2.00 THAT THE BELLBOY KEPT = £29.00.

WHERE IS THE OTHER POUND?

Pete · Post by **Pete** » Fri Nov 28, 08 3:37 pm

Is this how the credit crunch came about, only with bigger numbers?

SteveCase · Post by **SteveCase** » Fri Nov 28, 08 4:27 pm

If the rooms were upstairs, maybe he lost a pound running up the stairs!

MrNorm · Post by **MrNorm** » Fri Nov 28, 08 4:28 pm

Well this did make me think quite hard!!
My answer would be, yeah, the three guys paid a total of £27 for a £25 room. 27-25 =2, which is the tip that the bellboy got, right?
So it all adds up.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Fri Nov 28, 08 5:26 pm

they paid £10 each

then it went down to £8.33 each

so they needed £1.66 back each but only got £1.00

so they paid £9.33 each which is £27.99

Bellboy pocketed £.66p of each man for a total of £1.98

£27.99 + £1.98 = £30.00

well it does if you add in more decimal points

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Fri Nov 28, 08 5:44 pm

forget that, it adds up but it's wrong, should have added .666 to the total cost not the £1 DUH

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Fri Nov 28, 08 7:21 pm

Lookin @ it this way is a mathmatical error...........if you work it out any other way it adds up.

Hey Neil , would'nt it have been easier to work out the cost of those rods?

AllKiller · Post by **AllKiller** » Fri Nov 28, 08 7:29 pm

Im with Gavin on this one ....made my brain work then

Post by **TyreFryer** » Fri Nov 28, 08 7:37 pm

Good one Dave, this has had me going for a while...

You don't add the £2 to the £27 they paid, you take it away because it's part of the £27!

Very good.

Post by **TyreFryer** » Fri Nov 28, 08 7:40 pm

Oh yeh, that's what Gavin meant.

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Fri Nov 28, 08 8:19 pm

The answer is (and I had to ask wor lass 'cos she is the tax man and nowt gets past her in these matters) that they have not paid £9 each. They have all actually paid £9 + a third of £2 each. Now it ads up.

Dave-R · Post by **Dave-R** » Fri Nov 28, 08 8:20 pm

So Wil (I think) eventually got the answer right.

Post by **TyreFryer** » Fri Nov 28, 08 8:58 pm

Dave wrote:The answer is (and I had to ask wor lass 'cos she is the tax man and nowt gets past her in these matters) that they have not paid £9 each. They have all actually paid £9 + a third of £2 each. Now it ads up.

I don't think that's right Dave, they have paid £9 each because they collectively gave £30 and received £3 back. The confusion comes where you add £2 to the £27 they paid, where the £2 was part of that £27 already. The £27 consists of the £25 plus the £2, therefore you shouldn't add £2 to it.

Blimey, don't ask us any riddles!

Post by **TyreFryer** » Fri Nov 28, 08 9:02 pm

And if they'd paid £9 plus a third of £2 each that would still come to £29!

(£9 + £0.66) x 3 = £29.

Post by **MattH** » Fri Nov 28, 08 9:58 pm

I agree the £2 is part of the £27, not £30. But did they get back the 2.5% VAT rate cut??