Full cost = 0,000

Discounted cost = $ 99,900

70% Discount saving = 0,100

True or False. Or is there a way of creative accounting so that the above statements all become correct?

All answers greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Please give reasons / calculations for your answers.

Lachie – Thanks – just asking, so maybe I should be doing this hahahaha. Found the statements on a web site. 🙂

J V – Thanks – My teacher said, "very dodgy to assume with maths".

037 G – Thanks – Sell 2/3 a day. woot. 😛

Thanks 4 your answers – any more please.

Thank you. Found it hard to choose the Best Answer.

A 70% discount of 350,000 is

350,000 * 0.70 = $245,000 for a cost of $105,000

Discounting $250,100 from $350,000 is a

250,100/350,100 X 100 = 71.45% discount

If the discounted cost is 99,900 then

99,900/350,000 X 100 = 28.31% of the original price so the discount is 100-28.3 = 71.68%

As you can see none of the given numbers match up, but the best deal for a buyer is the 99,900 price and for a seller the 70% discount, which one are you?

it is false. It is actually MORE than 70%

70% discount would bring the price down to $105,000

the discount savings would be: $245,000

to get the savings you have mentioned the discount would have to be about 71.46% off but thats a rounded number.

and i think that if you have to ask if there are creative ways to bend the truth then maybe you shouldn’t be doing this hahahaha

I agree with the first answer.

250,100 is about 71.46% of 350,000.

I can’t see any benefit of creative accounting, since the savings is already understated.

It’s not a trick question where the figures are "after tax" I assume.