Come in and test your knowledge brehs

[Asicz]

Yall with this 30$ stuff


If something cost 70$ and you pay with 100$ you have to get 30$ in change. Nobody lost anything !

 

[Asicz]

Well, it depends on how much the goods were originally purchased for in acquisition. Obviously, items are marked up in the store so this one, in a real-life scenario, cannot be answered.

From a debits and credits perspective, this is the line of thinking:


D: debit (stolen cash) = -$100

C: credit (sale) = +$100

D: debit (change back to thief) = -$30

So worst case, he lost $30 + the wholesale cost of the items he sold to the thief

You just got finessed.

 

[MJ Truth]

He's lost nothing because we all know that punk ass owner is probably underpaying his employees.

 

[Sonic Boom of the South]

 

[Alaafin]

$100

even if the guy bought something, they owner didn't get anything back. the guy was making a purchase at that point

 

[Saiyajin]

$100

 

[CinnaSlim]

$100 stolen. -$100

$70 sale of goods -$170
$100 payment -$70
$30 change -$100

Your drawer is gonna be short $100. Since the sale was legit aka paid for (albeit with stolen money, you don't have to count that.)

He lost only $100 in cash and $70 if you count shrink/merchandise loss

How'd I do boss?

 

[Gold]

$100 stolen. -$100

$70 sale of goods -$170
$100 payment -$70
$30 change -$100

Your drawer is gonna be short $100. Since the sale was legit aka paid for (albeit with stolen money, you don't have to count that.)

He lost only $100 in cash and $70 shrink/merchandise loss

How'd I do boss?

Almost perfect till the last statement.

He didn't lose $70 in merchandise, he traded $70 of merchandise for $70 of currency.

Unless that's what you meant

 

[CinnaSlim]

Almost perfect till the last statement.

He didn't lose $70 in merchandise, he traded $70 of merchandise for $70 of currency.

Unless that's what you meant

You right. I'm just separating the cash transactions from an inventory perspective. That's why I used the word shrink. The merchandise could've gotten you $70 profit, if it was sold with legit cash.

I wasn't saying $170 as in cash and merchandise. I was saying the drawer is gonna be short $100.

I was saying if you look at it from inventory perspective, the dude stole the merchandise ($70 value) and gained $30 change which still comes out to $100 loss.

 

[25YOUTHS!!]

He's down $100 minus whatever markup he made from the products.
If the thief didn't spend the money in his store, he'd be out the whole $100.
I think the whole change thing is throwing people off for some reason


right?

 

[Gold]

He's down $100 minus whatever markup he made from the products.
If the thief didn't spend the money in his store, he'd be out the whole $100.
I think the whole change thing is throwing people off for some reason


right?

Ya'll are over complicating this.

We aren't asked to find out what his profit per sale is, its assumed that he is selling his goods at market value.
The thief spending the money in the same store is 100% irrelevant.
$100 was stolen, that is a completely separate incident than the purchase.

I'll put it this way, If I steal $100 from you, does it matter that I give you the same $100 bill back?

If any you are having trouble understanding this, think of it this way:

"-One person steals from $100 from the store, runs away, and is never seen ever again
-Someone else buys something in a store for an arbitrary amount of money

How much money is lost?"

The only thing that matters in this entire story is the 100 stolen. Literally everything stated after that is a normal everyday business interaction.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Try again

You have a befitting username.

 

[Fade Runner 2049]

Break it up into parts.

1. He looses $100 to theft. Whether or not the person pays with the same $100 is irrelevant, it could even be a different person. He lost $100 to theft period.

2. He sells $70 worth of good and receives $100 back. He is now gained 30 dollars so he is at a net -$70

3. He gives $30 in change. He is now back at -$100.

-$100 is the only answer

Almost perfect till the last statement.

He didn't lose $70 in merchandise, he traded $70 of merchandise for $70 of currency.

Unless that's what you meant

You in here breaking it down for people and still wrong the answer isn't $100

 

[Fade Runner 2049]

You have a befitting username.

I can do simple math, that's why I offer an inexpensive meal for people who can't

 

[25YOUTHS!!]

Ya'll are over complicating this.

We aren't asked to find out what his profit per sale is, its assumed that he is selling his goods at market value.
The thief spending the money in the same store is 100% irrelevant.
$100 was stolen, that is a completely separate incident than the purchase.

I'll put it this way, If I steal $100 from you, does it matter that I give you the same $100 bill back?

If any you are having trouble understanding this, think of it this way:

"-One person steals from $100 from the store, runs away, and is never seen ever again
-Someone else buys something in a store for an arbitrary amount of money

How much money is lost?"

The only thing that matters in this entire story is the 100 stolen. Literally everything stated after that is a normal everyday business interaction.

Depends on the perspective breh and if you treat the owner and store as one entity.
$100 is $100. The register is gonna be short that amount regardless... The identity of the $70 buyer doesn't matter.

Lets say you didn't sell anything on the day the $100 was taken: register=-100. Profit for the day=-100.
Lets say you sell $70 of product after the $100 was stolen (customer doesnt matter): register=-100. Profit for the day=-100+ whatever you made on the $70

Lets put it this way: What if the thief stole $100 worth of product(after taxes, markup) instead of cash? Would the losses be the same or do you have to take the markup into consideration since you didn't pay $100 for the products as the owner?