QUESTION OF THE DAY!
If you get the answer right, then you aren't olodo
some people will run away at the sight of this question.

A lady bought goods worth ₦200 and paid the shopkeeper with a ₦1000 Note. The Shopkeeper had no change on him so he went to another Shopkeeper John his neighbour and collected ₦1000 change in ₦200 denominations, with which he settled the lady
and she left.

A little while later, John came back angrily after he discovered the ₦1000 note he was given by
the shopkeeper was fake, and demanded a replacement.
To avoid trouble, the shopkeeper had to give John another ₦1000 and destroyed the counterfeit which had no real value.

So Question for the genius...
How much has the Shopkeeper lost in total?

the shopkeeper lost ₦1800 in this mess.....
₦200 for the shoes that was bought with the fake note
₦800 for the change given to the thief
₦800 that was repaid to the other shopkeeper (+₦200 given to him makes ₦1000)

MRBrownJ:
the shopkeeper lost ₦1800 in this mess.....
₦200 for the shoes that was bought with the fake note
₦800 for the change given to the thief
₦800 that was repaid to the other shopkeeper (+₦200 given to him makes ₦1000)

the shop keeper changed the 1000 Naira into N200note X 5
He then gave the lady N800 change and use the remaining last N200 for goods bought cos the shop keeper was said to had settled the lady and she left so,i believed shop keeper didn't giver all the change made, will probably removed money for shoe bought, in that case she paid for the goods purchased because she must have received[b] N800[/b] as change.


any approach is to ask yourself, who does he lost the[b] N1800[/b] to?
he took N1000 from the John and he only gave him N1000

islandmoon:


the shop keeper changed the 1000 Naira into N200note X 5
He then gave the lady N800 change and use the remaining last N200 for goods bought cos the shop keeper was said to had settled the lady and she left so,i believed shop keeper didn't giver all the change made, will probably removed money for shoe bought, in that case she paid for the goods purchased because she must have received[b] N800[/b] as change.


any approach is to ask yourself, who does he lost the[b] N1800[/b] to?
he took N1000 from the John and he only gave him N1000

no bro, the shopkeeker lost a pair of shoes ₦200 + ₦800 change he gave the thief + ₦1000 he repaid the other shopkeeper (-₦200 from the money he kept from 1st ₦1000 he got = ₦800).

the thief didnt pay for ANYTHING since her money was fake.
the confusing part here is the ₦200 that he kept out of the ₦1000 (5x₦200) he received from the shopkeeper.

1. He made a deal: He gave out change worth 800 and shoe worth 200 which was the initial deal at at this point all was right.

2. John came back to return the money which the store keeper gave him which means the store keeper gave out another 1,000 naira. Still if the money was just damaged and not counterfeit, all is still okay

So those are the stages for the normal situation.

Now when the money is counterfeit.
The store owner lost 800 naira in cash and a shoe worth 200 naira which is one thousand. If he did not go to John for change, he could have called it a theft and lost only 1,000 when he had to destroy the 1,000 note.
But he had to replace the money he had given to John and got nothing in return (the 1,000 was counterfeit) so he got zilch from that too.

This means that our store keeper lost 2,000 naira in total as he lost 800 in cash and 200 in goods (shoe) to the customer and also lost another 1,000 when he had to replace the money he gave to John which brings the total loss to 2,000

I might be very wrong though

.....

Mynd44:
1. He made a deal: He gave out change worth 800 and shoe worth 200 which was the initial deal at at this point all was right.
2. John came back to return the money which the store keeper gave him which means the store keeper gave out another 1,000 naira. Still if the money was just damaged and not counterfeit, all is still okay
So those are the stages for the normal situation.
Now when the money is counterfeit.
The store owner lost 800 naira in cash and a shoe worth 200 naira which is one thousand. If he did not go to John for change, he could have called it a theft and lost only 1,000 when he had to destroy the 1,000 note.
But he had to replace the money he had given to John and got nothing in return (the 1,000 was counterfeit) so he got zilch from that too.
This means that our store keeper lost 2,000 naira in total as he lost 800 in cash and 200 in goods (shoe) to the customer and also lost another 1,000 when he had to replace the money he gave to John which brings the total loss to 2,000
I might be very wrong though

he cant keep the ₦200 from the money he 1st received from John, and also claim that he lost the shoes from the thief. if he keeps the ₦200 left from the 1st ₦1000 he got, then the shoe has been paid for, and therefore it is not a loss......so it will be ₦1000+ ₦800.

still makes it ₦1800, as i said.

MRBrownJ:


he cant keep the ₦200 from the money he 1st received from John, and also claim that he lost the shoes from the thief. if he keeps the ₦200 left from the 1st ₦1000 he got, then the shoe has been paid for, and therefore it is not a loss......so it will be ₦1000+ ₦800.

still makes it ₦1800, as i said.

This is correct. I did not take that into consideration.

Thanks.

Mynd44:

You are not considering that our store keeper also lost a shoe worth 200 Naira to the thief meaning the thief got 1,000 for her thievry

John gave ₦1000 and received ₦1000
Shopkeeper gave ₦800 cash + ₦200 shoes + ₦1000 (repayment John) = ₦2000 ....... but he has ₦200 (money he kept from the 1st ₦1000) so ₦2000 - ₦200= ₦1800 loss

N1000 loss, the fake note he had to replace.

MRBrownJ:
the shopkeeper lost ₦1800 in this mess.....
₦200 for the shoes that was bought with the fake note
₦800 for the change given to the thief
₦800 that was repaid to the other shopkeeper (+₦200 given to him makes ₦1000)

The N800 change was from the other shopkeeper, so it won't form part of his loss...

Mynd44:

This is correct. I did not take that into consideration.

Thanks.

that's not correct either, the business was normal until 1000 was torn, and thats the same 1000 being replaced..
we need some gurus here, i think the shopkeeper only lost 1000

cc:lalastical, seun, ishilove, we need answer to this, move it to front page, this is a good interview question

islandmoon:


that's not correct either, the business was normal until 1000 was torn, and thats the same 1000 being replaced..
we need some gurus here, i think the shopkeeper only lost 1000

cc:lalastical, seun, we need answer to this, help us move it to front page, this is a good interview question

He lost 1,800 actually.

Mynd44:

He lost 1,800 actually.

he lost 1800 to who?

islandmoon:


he lost 1800 to who?

He lost 800 naira to the thief and lost 1000 naira due to the counterfeit money.

If he did not go to John to break the money down, he would have only lost 800 naira

opeyemmmy:

The N800 change was from the other shopkeeper, so it won't form part of his loss...

if he has to repay it, is that not a loss? remember he got this money because he thought it was real, while it wasnt.

opeyemmmy:
N1000 loss, the fake note he had to replace.

so the other shopkeeper gave him FREE money (₦1000)?! ahahahah

islandmoon:

that's not correct either, the business was normal until 1000 was torn, and thats the same 1000 being replaced..
we need some gurus here, i think the shopkeeper only lost 1000
cc:lalastical, seun, we need answer to this, help us move it to front page, this is a good interview question

bro this issue is so simple, the reason you are not getting it right is because you think the fake money had no value, while it has because the shopkeeper gave the change to the thief....all what the thief took for free is a loss (₦200 shoes+₦800change) and all what shopkeeper had to pay to John is a loss too because it was from fake money (₦1000)....... that's a total of ₦2000, but since the shopkeeper has ₦200 left from the money John lent him, you have to take it out of his loss. so, thats ₦2000 loss - ₦200 gain, therefore Total loss =₦1800

Mynd44:

He lost 800 naira to the thief and lost 1000 naira due to the counterfeit money.
If he did not go to John to break the money down, he would have only lost 800 naira

no, if he did not go to John he would have still lost ₦1000 (₦200 shoes + ₦800 change)
the reason why everyone is mistaking here is because he did not pay back ₦1000 to John, he only paid ₦800 back to John, and gave him the ₦200 left from the initial money.

1200
#200 for the shoes and #1000 that she gave back to the other lady

opeyemmmy:
N1000 loss, the fake note he had to replace.

You are brilliant Bro.

adonismuller:
1200

#200 for the shoes and #1000 that she gave back to the other lady

He paid himself 200 from the 1000 Naira, remember he got change and gave her 800 , then took 200 for the shoe before john came back.

islandmoon:


He paid himself 200 from the 1000 Naira, remember he got change and gave her 800 , then took 200 for the shoe before john came back.

He paid himself #200 and gave the guy #800 change plus shoe of #200, leta the woman came and collected her 1k back meaning the #200 he paid himself is among the #1000 given back to the woman,now the shoe he gave the guy is gone,meaning she has lost that #200!

Now add the 1000 she gave back and the 200 shoe!

opeyemmmy:
N1000 loss, the fake note he had to replace.

you are wrong!

The simple logic is, she gave John back his 1000,and gave the fraudstar #200 shoe!

adonismuller:
you are wrong!

The simple logic is, she gave John back his 1000,and gave the fraudstar #200 shoe!

With the exclamation marks in your post, one would think you are right.

He gave the lady the shoes in exchange for N200, remember? He keeps one note of N200 from the 5 notes the other shopkeeper changed for him.

If we assume the N1000 note wasn't a counterfeit note, would the shopkeeper have suffered any loss?

Alternatively, can we agree that the shopkeeper's loss is the lady's gain? So how much has the lady gained? N800 change and N200 shoes, which is N1000.

The shopkeeper lost only 1000.

see it from this view. The business was normal until John returned the fake 1000 note. This is the most basic explanation to it.

In other words, the thief carted away with 1000 (800 balance and 200 shoe) while John collected back the money he gave but in another denomination.

Mynd44:

He lost 800 naira to the thief and lost 1000 naira due to the counterfeit money.

If he did not go to John to break the money down, he would have only lost 800 naira

He lost only 1000 not 1800. He lost 1000 by given the theif 800 balance and the 200 worth of shoes. What happened between him and john was just a fair exchange without any negative effect. John did not made any profit or scam him.

Everything was fair not until John asked for a replacement of the 1000 counterfeit.

its amazing how people STILL dont get it.....ok lets show you guys like we were talking to children.

- SHOPKEEPER starts with ₦0 + a pair of shoes worth ₦200
- SHOPKEEPER gets a fake note of ₦1000 and gives the THIEF a pair of shoes worth ₦200... so total shopkeeper loss is ₦200
- SHOPKEEPER has no change and gives the fake note to John who gives him ₦1000
- SHOPKEEPER gives ₦800 to THIEF as change for the fake ₦1000... so total shopkeeper loss now is ₦1000 ( ₦200 shoes + ₦800 changes)
- SHOPKEEPER now has to repay JOHN because the money was fake, so he gives JOHN the ₦200 left from the initial ₦1000 he received from him, and takes another ₦800 from his pocket to make the ₦1000 that he owes JOHN... so total loss by the SHOPKEEPER is ₦1000+₦800= ₦1800

pansophist:
The shopkeeper lost only 1000.
see it from this view. The business was normal until John returned the fake 1000 note. This is the most basic explanation to it.
In other words, the thief carted away with 1000 (800 balance and 200 shoe) while John collected the money he gave back but in another denomination.

Let's assume shop keeper has 1,000 note
Customer gives fake 1000 he takes to his neighbour and collects 5 pieces of N200 and give N800 to the customer
He has 1,200 left in his safe(coffers)
Then his neighbour comes to harass him, he returns the real 1 k and collects the fake one.
He has fake 1k and N200 which is the value of the goods.
Then he tears the fake 1k, so he has 200naira left so if u subtract the 200naira from the 1k, he lost only 800naira and the 200naira goods that left the shop

MRBrownJ:
its amazing how people STILL dont get it.....ok lets show you guys like we were talking to children.

- SHOPKEEPER starts with ₦0 + a pair of shoes worth ₦200
- SHOPKEEPER gets a fake note of ₦1000 and gives the THIEF a pair of shoes worth ₦200... so total shopkeeper loss is ₦200
- SHOPKEEPER has no change and gives the fake note to John who gives him ₦1000
- SHOPKEEPER gives ₦800 to THIEF as change for the fake ₦1000... so total shopkeeper loss now is ₦1000 ( ₦200 shoes + ₦800 changes)
- SHOPKEEPER now has to repay JOHN because the money was fake, so he gives JOHN the ₦200 left from the initial ₦1000 he received from him, and takes another ₦800 from his pocket to make the ₦1000 that he owes JOHN... so total loss by the SHOPKEEPER is ₦1000+₦800= ₦1800

Wrong.

I think the most confusing part to most people here is the part John played. John only gave 1000, and collected 1000 back. No lose, no gain. The only lost here is the money the thief stole, thats all.


---See it from this way, I hope my illustration will be clear.

1. Shopkeeper has to borrow N1000 from John (NOTE: the fake currency has no significance here) to give a customer he owe N1000 from a previous goods delivery (the thief who stole 200 shoes and 800 balance). later, John came to collect his N1000 he borrowed to the shopkeeper. So basically, The shopkeeper gave out N1000 he genuinely owe John. Later, the Shopkeeper realized the 1000 worth of goods the customer gave him ealier was a fake, and it came to light that he has been scammed of N1000.

Like I said earlier, business was normal not until John came to ask for a refund of his N1000, which retroactively bring to light the missing 1000 (200 shoes and 800 balance) stolen by the thief. The fake 1000 currency is bringing an illusion of significance, its has no basis here.

lol now i see where you guys get it wrong.

pansophist:


Wrong.

I think the most confusing part to most people here is the part John played. John only gave 1000, and collected 1000 back. No lose, no gain. The only lost here is the money the thief stole, thats all.


---See it from this way, I hope my illustration will be clear.

1. Shopkeeper has to borrow N1000 from John (NOTE: the fake currency has no significance here) to give a customer he owe N1000 from a previous goods delivery (the thief who stole 200 shoes and 800 balance). later, John came to collect his N1000 he borrowed to the shopkeeper. So basically, The shopkeeper gave out N1000 he genuinely owe John. Later, the Shopkeeper realized the 1000 worth of goods the customer gave him ealier was a fake, and it came to light that he has been scammed of N1000.

Like I said earlier, business was normal not until John came to ask for a refund of his N1000, which retroactively bring to light the missing 1000 (200 shoes and 800 balance) stolen by the thief. The fake 1000 currency is bringing an illusion of significance, its has no basis here.

are you saying that the money AND shoes the THIEF took is not a loss?!?!?!?!?!?!

the thief went away with ₦1000 worth of goods which is shopkeeper's loss, isnt it? or are you claiming that what the thief took is not a loss?... then on top of that the Shopkeeper had to repay JOHN the borrowed ₦1000, so thats a ₦2000 loss. now deduct the ₦200 left from the initial ₦1000 he got from john, thats ₦1800. simple mathematics!!!

MBJ must be frustrated right now.

Jaybee3

Please come and explain this to these people before MBJ hits someone around the head with a steel pipe

MRBrownJ:
lol now i see where you guys get it wrong.



are you saying that the money AND shoes the THIEF took is not a loss?!?!?!?!?!?!

the thief went away with ₦1000 worth of goods which is shopkeeper's loss, isnt it? or are you claiming that what the thief took is not a loss?... then on top of that the Shopkeeper had to repay JOHN the borrowed ₦1000, so thats a ₦2000 loss. now deduct the ₦200 left from the initial ₦1000 he got from john, thats ₦1800. simple mathematics!!!

If you read my post well, you would have saw where I wrote: ''The only lost here is the money the thief stole''.

Of course the thief went away with 1000 worth of goods, and thats the only lost incurred in this transaction. Refund of money borrowed is not loss, so definitely he lost nothing refunding John his money. The 200 the shopkeeper has left is the payment of the shoe the thief stole.

pansophist:


If you read my post well, you would have saw where I wrote: ''The only lost here is the money the thief stole''.

Of course the thief went away with 1000 worth of goods, and thats the only lost incurred in this transaction. Refund of money borrowed is not loss, so definitely he lost nothing refunding John his money. The 200 the shopkeeper has left is the price of the shoe the thief stole.

Aaaaarrrrgghhhhhhhhh.
He had to take money from his pocket to refund John. Where will the money to refund John come from?

John brough back the counterfeit money right? And the our store keeper has to look for another N1000 to give to John

Mynd44:

Aaaaarrrrgghhhhhhhhh.
He had to take money from his pocket to refund John. Where will the money to refund John come from?

John brough back the counterfeit money right? And the our store keeper has to look for another N1000 to give to John

The 1000 the shopkeeper gave to John is the only lost here (a replacement of the counterfeit), if he borrowed it from bank, he will have to refund the bank 1000.