- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Help with riddle - How Much Money Did The Store Lose?
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:37 pm to 21JumpStreet
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:37 pm to 21JumpStreet
quote:
On the surface $100. $70 in goods and $30 in cash, but diving deeper it's really $30 in cash and cost of goods that the store paid for the items that was bought.
That's too difficult to comprehend for some folks in here.
I can tell you that the store owner does not see it this way, that's why some items are locked up and require a key to access like razorblades and video games and other items are sitting right by the register.
1
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:38 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
I can tell you that the store owner does not see it this way
Your argument is that a business owner will think $100 short register is somehow costing him less than $100?
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:39 pm to 21JumpStreet
quote:
That's on the surface
No, it's reality.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:40 pm to 21JumpStreet
quote:Don't dive deeper. What if the thief waited a month before returning to buy the goods or simply used a different $100 bill? None of that matters because the second part of the question (returns and buys goods) is irrelevant.
but diving deeper it's really $30 in cash and cost of goods that the store paid for the items that was bought.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:40 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Yes this is true. If the owner took a shite in a jar and slapped $100 price tag on it and then the thief bought it with the $100 bill, the store actually wouldn't have lost any money.
At the end of the day when the store owner opens his cash register and sees there is only $100 in it, he won't be saying "I didn't lose anything because I sold something worth zero for $100" he will be saying "Where the fk is my other $100"
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:40 pm to LNCHBOX
I'm telling you if someone steals $70 worth of drinks from the soda fountain the owner won't lose as much (or be as mad) as if someone steals $70 worth of liquor bottles.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:41 pm to 21JumpStreet
You're free to make an argument against it. But all of the most stupid arguments have already been used in the last few pages, so make sure you aren't repeating any of those when you do.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:43 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
I'm telling you if someone steals $70 worth of drinks from the soda fountain the owner won't lose as much (or be as mad) as if someone steals $70 worth of liquor bottles.
$70 of lost sales is $70 of lost sales. You are trying to muddy the waters to argue something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
$100 was stolen. The transaction that followed has no bearing on it. Unless you really want to make the argument that the thief could cancel out his $100 theft by spending enough money.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:44 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
$70 of lost sales is $70 of lost sales. You are trying to muddy the waters to argue something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Where did the store lose sales in this hypothetical?
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:45 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Where did the store lose sales in this hypothetical?
Careful, you're about to frick up your own argument further
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:53 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Unless you really want to make the argument that the thief could cancel out his $100 theft by spending enough money.
He couldn't cancel out his theft. The store could "not lose money" if the thief bought something that cost nothing with the stolen hundred dollars but that would be a crazy scenario.
My argument is the store did not lose $100 since still retained $70. They lost the cost of the goods and the $30 because thats what they are out after the transactions.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:55 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
My argument is the store did not lose $100 since still retained $70.
That's a stupid argument.
quote:They did not lose anything in the sale transaction as that transaction went exactly as it should have.
They lost the cost of the goods and the $30 because thats what they are out after the transactions.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 3:57 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
They did not lose anything in the sale transaction as that transaction went exactly as it should have
They gained the margin on the sale.
To further this point, they would have sold the thief as many of that item as he could afford to buy for $70 each because to them it is worth less than $70. It is worth $70 to the consumer but not to the store.
Which is why employee discounts exist.
This post was edited on 12/12/23 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 12/12/23 at 4:01 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
They gained the margin on the sale.
Which changes nothing. They are still $100 short on the register count.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 4:04 pm to LNCHBOX
$100 short in the register, a few $ ahead in sales, therefore the store didn't lose the entire $100.
The store encompasses the total value of the business, not just the register.
The store encompasses the total value of the business, not just the register.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 4:10 pm to Seaux_cal_tiger
The initial theft is all that is relevant.
The subsequent transaction is not relevant in calculating a legal claim of loss.
The subsequent transaction is not relevant in calculating a legal claim of loss.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 4:12 pm to Corinthians420
There are some not smart people in this thread. The store lost $100. Any “profit” the store made from the sale was their own money.
Posted on 12/12/23 at 4:16 pm to threeputt
quote:
The store lost $100. Any “profit” the store made from the sale was their own money
This would be true if they didn't get $70 back. When they got $70 back all they lost was $30 and their cost on the goods that the thief gained.
Page 13 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News