POLL: MAN STEALS $100 FROM a STORE'S REGISTER. THEN HE BUYS $70 OF GOODS FROM THAT STORE & GETS $30 CHANGE. HOW MUCH DID THE STORE LOSE?

He returned $70 in cash, and ended up stealing $30 in cash and $70 in product.

F

No because 70 went back into the the till, and the assumption here is that the products that the store sells did not cost them anything to acquire.

Maybe this little thinking game should say that they do have a specific profit margin..

Say that a DVD cost the store $10, and they sell it for $20. A pair of jeans cost them $40 and they sell them $80. Shoes cost them $25 and they sell them for $50 etc. etc., same rate of profit all across the board on all their products.

Y'all going to have to repeat the 5th grade!

$170. He takes $100 from the store, and then takes $70 worth of groceries for free, when you factor in it is the stores money he stole in the 1st place, that he used to pay.

It's $100 you morons.

This is where IQ comes in handy. Abstract thought.

The profit margin doesn't matter because the value of a product is what the market will pay for it, which in this case would have been $70, regardless of what the store paid to stock it.

You are counting future sales. The immediate loss is less than $100

The store would have lost the whole $100, but he traded it back for product that retails at $70 and they gave him $30 cash.

Last Edited by BRIEF on 01/25/2023 09:11 AM

$200

Something I heard years ago came to mind....figures don't lie but liars figure.

Too simple.
$100

The man walked into the store empty handed with $0.
He left with $70 of groceries and $30.
In with 0.
Out with 100.

He's up 100 and the store is down 100.


R.

Then the store lost $30, because the products that the store sells didn't cost the store any money to acquire in this hypothetical situation.

The 100 does count, because it went missing from the till thus setting the store back $100; but then they got 70 of the hundred back, that is because in this hypothetical situation the store's products that they sell didn't cost them anything.

Last Edited by Asuralikeproduction on 01/25/2023 09:14 AM

Less than 100, unless the store sells at cost lol

Credits
-100$ initial loss from drawer
-70$ merchandise
-30$ change back from the purchase

Total: 200$ in credits

Debits
+100$ (100$ bill into drawer)

Total: 100$ in debits

Credits exceeds debits by 100$.

Welcome to entry level accounting. Put your negatives in one column and your positives in the other column. You lost 100$. The guy left with 70$ of stuff and 30$ in cash.

Then title flawed.

No product is free, but we haven't calculated the loss of having to replace the product that he stole...No one else can buy it if he took it.

We can assume the product cost the store less than $70, or it's not a business. A business must make a profit...

I think we are at the point where it's ok to steal from corporate mega outfits. They are a huge part of the problem and they hate us anyway.

Correct.

Forget about the 100 bucks. The thief walked in flat broke the walked out with 70/30. 100 total.

Seems this is what fucks with people's heads.

The simplest way is to forget the $100 that left the drawer and then went back in = 0

He took $70 worth of product and $30 cash

With a 100% mark up, the store lost $65

Last Edited by BRIEF on 01/25/2023 09:27 AM

$100

Is what the thief gains truly equal to what the store loses?

This could go on all day!

Then what is the answer if we assume that everything the stores sells, they sell for double of what it cost them. Like my previous example of a DVD costing them 10, but they sell it for 20....

Answer E, nulifies all the above.

hilarious seeing posts like this calling everyone stupid, yet not giving an answer themselves.

can't be wrong when you don't answer and just ridicule others!

Crypto people are so toxic and it shows in a bear market.

BTW, my credit/debit split was exactly right.

I hope your day gets better. You're obviously unhappy and projecting it into other people.