I Have 100 Dollars. I Buy X Pieces Of Newpapers That Costs 13 Dollars For Each. Make An Equation

A company is buying a product that costs Rs. 5 and sells it at Rs. 4.5 while making a profit of Rs. 1 lac. How does it work?

I did ask the question but probably people are not getting it correctly and it's really good concept which more people should know of ! CREDIT : my dad ! So if you have read the details I mentioned the difference in buying conditions. Company 1 : it is buying the product at RS. 5 but the condition was that they will pay the company on the 3rd month. For example : the company is taking 1 lakh product pieces every month so for two month it sold the pieces. Profit : 9lacAnd then put this money into the market to earn interest. And on the 3rd month it paid the company it's price. And still earning more from market and increasing it's users too. Company 2: it bought the product every month and sold it for the same price but it paid every month. So no profits there. Hope you get it now (:EDIT : it's a real concept followed by many companies so it's already working. My dad company follow this concept too.Edit 2: woww ! I got so many different and good well explained answers for earning profits while selling the product in loss. Well let me just explain some more. I never said company was getting benefit of 1 lakh per 3 months. It was a year revenue. Probably I just took it normally as I calculate revenue per year. Sorry for that. And the second thing is; if you are a big buyer (as in buy a lot of product) from a company they avoid asking for interest on credit as they do not want to loose a major customer. As the companies which outsource product (which makes parts of Honda or Hero or even Maruti) and they are already big in themselves but can't handle that much order. They take products from out source people and don't pay them anything for 2-3 months. And still get the payment which they use in market and then after 3 month they pay the company in which they outsourced the product, increasing their gains. It can be applied reverse too. As in for the company mentioned in the question, credit without interest.

If 1 kg of something costs 180 rupees, then what will be the cost of 600g?

1kg = 1000 grams1kg = 1000 grams costs 180 Rupees,so 1 gram costs 180/1000 = 0.18 rupeesSo, 600 gram would cost 600g*0.18Rs = 108 Rupees

If 1kg of fish costs 200 rupees, what will be the cost of 700 grams?

1kg fish means 1000 grams fish. So by applying unitary method we can easily get the cost of 700 grams.1000grams costs 200rupees.So 1 gram will cost 200/1000 rupees.So 700 grams will cost (200/1000)× 700 rupeesThat means 140 rupees.Answer is 140 rupees.

A shopkeeper cheats to the extent of 10% while buying and selling, by using false weights. What is his total gain?

The ans can never be 21%The question is roundabout. Very bad.What it actually means that shop keeper pretends that he is doing a zero sum business but cheats by weight. 10% when buying the goods. 10% while selling. That means for 100 unit of goods, he buys 110 unit and when selling 100 unit he sells 90 unit.Coming to the point, why the ans can never be 21%, please do the thought experiment.Imagine you are a shop keeper.And imagine an electronic weight machine which can be tweaked.(analogue or digital is inconsequential)Supplier puts 110 unit of goods on weight machine.But it shows 100 unit hence cheating the supplier 10 % of weight while buying. Everything is ok up to this point.While selling, the same weight machine will show 100 unit only if there is an actual weight of 110 unit. So,Weight machineshows 110unit——— actual weight 100Shows 100 unit when------actual weight is 1000/11=90(10/11)So, when he pretends to sell 100 units on the machine, he will be cheating by 9(1/11) % of weight, not 10 % in order to get 121% or 21% of profit.Long story short: 2 different machines or setups have to be used because the one which is used for purchasing 10% more will only help him cheat for 9(1/11). So, for 1st setup for buying 10% more, 2nd, for selling 10% less. After buying 110 unit, you sell it---To cheat by 10% imagine he is using a false weight, 100 unit that is actually a 90.90 unit pretends to be 100 unit110 pretends to be 110x100/90122(2/9)So in the total transaction his gain is 122(2/9) - 100= 22(2/9)%It is not a simple profit and loss problem. So please think it through, by using imagination.Ans. will be 22.22222…Thanks.

What is the solution for the puzzle below? Is the question valid?

The question sure is valid but the logic is wrong.Questions like these never get old. I have been seeing them for several years now.The answer to all of those questions is the same thing. You are adding the wrong column. Balances should not be added and they are not supposed to total. Period.Let’s see why this is so.[math]20 + 15 + 9 + 6 = 50[/math]Everyone agrees on that. To get the same 50 with another set of numbers, they have to be the same or some additive combination of these numbers. If you pick a random set of numbers then there is no way they add up to give the same value.Now, Let’s look at the balances. I will write them in a different way.[math]30 = 50 - 20[/math][math]15 = 30 - 15[/math][math]6 = 15 - 9[/math][math]0 = 6 - 6[/math]So, Let’s see what happens when you add the balances[math]30 + 15 + 6 = 50 - 20 + 30 - 15 + 15 - 9 + 6 - 6[/math][math] = 20 + 10 + 30 - 15 + 15 - 9 + 6 - 6[/math][math] = 20 + 15 + 6 + 40 - 15 - 9 - 6[/math][math] = (20 + 15 + 6 + 9) + 1[/math]And, That is why you are getting an extra 1. You are not adding the same numbers here. And, hence you get a different result/And, In-fact If you just change the order of the first column, the value you get for the balance changes.As, you see it all depends on the first value in the balance. If you give Zero (0) the first time. the first column in the Balance would be 50 and anything you add to it would be more than 50.But, If you want to get the balance to be the same as the Spent sum then you can do the following:There you go. You got your 50. Now you can forget about that one rupee and be happy.So This whole problem is just a logical fallacy. But, the solution is simple enough.And BTW, I wrote the same answer to another same (~~) question here. Look at that too if you want : Durga Swaroop's answer to What is the answer to this tricky question?