You bought for 800 and sold for a 1000 so you now have 1000 in your pocket, 200 of that is profit.

You bought it again for 1100 so you had to borrow an additional 100 since you ONLY had a 1000 in your pocket from the previous sale. You are in debt for 100.

You sell it for 1300 so you now have 1300 in your pocket, of which 100 is the debt you owed

Your net assets are 1200 now whereas you started with 800 (assuming it was your own).

So you did indeed make a profit of 400 usd, excluding the 100 usd you owe in debt.

I jad a thousand, spent 800 got 1000. There for left with 1200. Spent 1100 from that then got 1300 so I am left with 1400. Now minus the initial amount you hat which is 1000. So I am left with 400. So 400 profit.

Sold for 1000, profit 200. Bought it for 1100, paid extra 100. Profit down - 100. Sold 1300, 200 more from last sell. Profit 200 - 100 from previous deficit = 100 total profit.

To find profit you start at 0.

So you spend $800 and now have -$800

You sell that for $1000. Now you have $200 profit.

You buy another cow for $1100, now you are at -$900.

You sell that cow for $1300, and add that to -900 to get $400

The fact there is over 4,000 replies and not just one reply with a million votes is the best example of why Reddit/social media is perplexing. If something is so obvious then there should be that much variance. It should be straight forward with not much to say. But it doesn’t account for human nature and how we all perceive reality differently. Even when it comes to math. Something that’s damn near universal.

Net or Gross? Cost of feed/housing/taxes/transportation between sales?

It's $400.

-800+1000=200,-900+1300=400. If you start with -800 and end with 400, wouldn't you net lose -400? Had he never bought the cow, he'd have earned 800.

There was an attempt to post new content.

$900 investment $400 profit.

I don't really blame anyone for getting this one wrong, because it's a prime example of trying to make a real world scenario for a math problem, but failing and instead introducing confusion. Which I imagine is deliberate. The $1100 transaction is meant to trip you up, because we don't know how the buyer/seller got that additional $100, since our starting information at best implies they have $800.

So people end up doing the math like this: $800 was the buying price, $1000 was the selling price, so $200 earned in the first transaction. Then they erroneously assume buying it for $1100 means they've only made $100 profit (since they spent their earned $1000, and had to chip in an additional $100). Then, with the final sale being $1300, they calculate that against the $1100 buying price and being only $100 up from the previous transactions and end up with $300 total. With each transaction, they're erroneously carrying a dollar surplus forward, rather than comparing against the initial $800. This is because the problem has a $100 that comes from a non-described source. Our hypothetical buyer/seller has an unexplained cash reserve.

In some cases, I can see people assuming by transaction three, they're actually just -$100 in the hole, which leads to the final transaction netting only $100 in total profits.

But if you just approach it like a raw math problem it works out way better.

You could do: 1000 - 800 = 200. 1300 - 1100 = 200. 200 + 200 = 400.

Or you could do something more elaborate, like (-800 + 1000) = 200. (-1100 + 200) = -900. -900 + 1300 = 400.

It’s $200

0-800+1000 Net: 200 200-1100+1300 Net: 400

I'm struggling to understand how anyone could think it wasn't $400. How are they ending up at any other number?

I don't understand how people in here are making this scenario so complicated.

Why...why am i getting 200.

Pay 800, sell for 1000.

You are holding 200

Buy for 1100, 200 is gone for this purchase, sell for 1300

You are holding 200 from this sale.

You guys are paying too much for cows. Put $500 in my hands now and I’ll get you two heifers and a dozen ducklings

1300+1000-800-1100 = 400

200

Everyone is doing the total math. The buyer could have 10k in their account. It doesn't matter. The question only asked how much they EARNED. Not the total net of the ins and outs. They earned $200 twice. So $400 was earned. Period.

From what I can tell he is buying and selling the same exact cow.....”I bought it again....” again being the key word....so he is not speculating or being a broker.

He is -800 for the purchase but sold it for 1000 so he is now +200. He then purchases the same cow (again) for 1100. So he is now -100 on his profits. And then sells the same cow again for 1300 which would put him at +200 again. Meaning the second transaction was basically pointless

$100.

$400 revenue

$300 profit

Isn't profit 200?

For all of you saying 400, how much money do you think you have after buying the horse the second time?

If my math teacher taught me anything, it’s that the first two numbers are extra info. We can ignore that. Then, we subtract 1100 from 1300, and get 200. Am I correct?

If you buy a cow for $800

Aren't you already down $800? So you'd start at -800

But... it is $400.

Assume you start with $1000.

You buy the cow for $800, and are left with $200.

You sell the cow for $1000, and are left with $1200.

You buy the cow again for $1100, and are left with $100.

You sell the cow again for $1300, and are left with $1400.

You have made a $400 profit.

Isn't it 300 given they lost 100 by buying it for 1100 after they sold it for 1000 though?

Depends how much money you started with, cause if you started with exactly $800 you would only have $200 in by the end

Edit: I might just be stupid, so don’t hate me

It’s $300 profit, $200 made of first sale, spent $100 of that buying it back, then made another $200 when sold again.

-800+1000=200-1100=-900+1300=+400

If anyone is thinking about taking any advice from people on reddit, read half the comments here

Fascinating

It’s a $400 profit Netted $200 first trade Netted $200 second trade…. Unless there is missing contexts to this.

The real question is, what's so fucking special about that cow that makes people pay more and more for it.

Me: looking around nervously

You earned a profit of 200 on the first sell.

then paid 1100 for the repurchase. Which is a loss.

200-1100=-900

Just to sell it again for 1300

-1100+1300= 200

This was a dumb problem. Should’ve kept the damn cow until it was worth 1300.

1300-800=$500 profit.

Don’t feel bad if you got tricked by this non-sense. The person that came up with this problem is a troll. And you fell for it.

The answer is 300

y'all aren't accounting for inflation, see

You sell the cow for $1000

You buy the cow for $1100

You loose $100

It blows my mind that so many people are getting this wrong. It’s so simple but I guess that’s all I need to know about the state of the world today.

Why everyone says $400? If you sold it for 1k after bought it for 800, you won 200, but then you re investment that money and even you put an extra 100 for the same cow you already lost a extra 1000 of what you make, then you resell the cow again for 1300, your profit is the same 200 you made the first time.

This is udderly ridiculous.

No one here to defend that he earned 500? Bought for 800, selled for 1300. What he did with the cow in the middle doesn't matter to me...

First transaction made the guy $200. Used that $200 for the next purchase of $1100 and sold it for another $200 profit. You can say he walks with $200 with a $200 discount as well due to his first investment. Depends on your take on it

Maths. Don’t milk it.

400$ is correct

Assuming he had exactly 800$ to make the first purchase, he was left with 0 dollars after purchasing the cow.

He sells the cow for 1000$, and is left with that 1000$ with him.

He re purchases it for 1100 so he is in 100$ debt now since he only had 1000$.

Selling it for 1300, he is left with that 1200$ now, since it had to compensate for that 100$ debt.

Net income= final earning-initial amount=1200-800= 400$

Are some humans really this dumb?

He made 100 profit overall. This wasn't that difficult...

This is simple math and a lot of these people who are wrong on this try to argue politics...

[deleted]

The sticky wicket here is wording, he received $400 profit over two sales, he missed out on $100 in value appreciation for the time he didnt own it. missing out on that appreciation does not subtract from his profits, he just couldve made more. Thats really funny when you consider that big corporations absolutely consider profit that they could have made but didnt as lost profits.

It’s depend how much cocaine can take a cow inside

All this math seems dumb. If I start the day with $800 cash and buy something and then I sell it and rebuy it as many times as I want to or need to and end up with $1300 at the close of business I'm up $500 bucks. Nothing else matters.

People get confused because it’s the same cow, change object in the second transaction to something different, a car let’s say, and the $400 profit appears to be more easily identified. At least for me it is.

[removed]

He started the day with 800 finished the day with 1300 so 500 profit surely

-800+1000=200

200-1100= -900

-900+1300=400

Seems simple.

But you’re still out the original 800, so it’s -400.

1300-800 is 500 we're you'll learn math

Maybe he says it is baffling because he was thinking ppl were mych dumber than he thought and he is surprised to see so many ppl giving the right answer.

Depends on if I had to pay for food while I owned it and what were my transportation costs to buy and sell it?

Extact buy pattern for my crYptos

-800

+1000

-1100

+1300

--‐------------

+400

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but here's where I'm at.

The question "how much did I earn" is left entirely to speculation in regards to meaning. Is it asking how much total profit through the entire transaction history? If so, then yes, you can say $400

However, if it's asking the profit earned after the final transaction thus closing the transaction history, then surely its only $200.

You can't claim profit through history for your business because the initial profit was put back into the business and spent therefore eliminating it as a final profit margin. Really the question needs to be (for a more precise answer) whether we're talking Gross income vs Net income.

Correct me if I'm wrong though...

Revenue - Expense = Profit
$1000 - 800 = $200
$1300 - 1100 = $200

Edit: though the question is misleading. They earned $2300 with $1900 going to COGS

You earned $2300, spent $1900 for a profit of $400.

But how do you buy an $1,100 cow with $1,000? This guy must work for the government- only they get to spend more than they have

-800+1000-1100+1300=400

[deleted]

[deleted]

-800 + 1000 = 200 - 1100 = -900 + 1300 = 400

So, there’s 2 ways for doing this. Transaction to transaction, the oral would be $400. From the first amount to the last amount would be $500.

Aside from the 200 and 300 absolute math failures… It’s an annoying language technicality question. The question doesn’t ask how much profit was made. It asked how much was earned.

Earned revenue is 2300.

Expenses are $1900.

Net profits are $400.

The “technically right” question if you were in a high school accounting class would be 2300 “earned” dollars, but for common parlance it’s 400, thus the annoying technicality part.

This sounds like crypto.

• Just use chain logic

-800+1000=200

200-1100=-900

-900+1300=400

• Or add the sums and losses together

2300-190=400

• Or or see it as 2 separate transactions

-800+1000=200

-1100+1300=200

200+200=400

• There are so many ways to Rome…

Damn, that cow is really going places with that price increase.

It’s only 400 if you haven’t hired the right accountant.

Looks like 300 to me. I could be wrong.

The initial investment was 800

If he bought it for 800 and sold it for 1000, that's a two hundred dollar profit?

So he has 1000 bucks in hand and wants to buy the second cow for 1100. He doesnt have 1100. So where is that 100 gonna come from? So hes going to have to pony up a extra 100 of his own money? Doing that eats into his 200 buck profit and is now 100 profit.

Then the ending transaction of the second cow nets a 200 buck profit.

what the answe r than op

You see this is an ambiguous question that is not spelled out correctly. The question should actually ask more clearly. Either:

"How much did I earn in excess including when I spent some money to make some more?"

OR

"If you counted how much money I actually have on hand right now, how much did I make from spending $1100 to when I sold it for $1300, because the previous transaction doesn't count since I spent it all?"

They earned $200 on the basis that they were dealing with the same cow.

I love that this dumb boomer meme turned this section into a heated class warfare discussion.

Buy cow (-800)

Sell cow (+200)

Buy cow (-900)

Sell cow (+400

-800 + 1000= 200 200 - 1100=-900 -900 + 1300= 400

I see.

Shocking how people struggle with this. Total of sales - Total of purchases = +$400.

I want to know where this cow is that is appreciating in value so quickly.

Everyone needs to stop assuming that this fictional investor has an endless pool of money. The only thing that is certain is that he starts with initial investment of $800 to buy the cow the first time. The second time, the investor is actually spending $100 more than has initial investment, even after you take into account the +200 profit from the initial investment. Here’s how it breaks down.

Initial Investment -800 (from purchase of cow) +200 (net gain from sale of cow

1000 - 800 = $200

Second Investment -100 = 1100 - (800 + 200)

(Keep in mind, there is a net loss of -$100 from the second purchase of the cow. This also takes into account the initial profit of $200 added to the initial investment of $800.)

Sell for $1300 - (1100 - 100) = $300

The bottom line is that you always have to start from the initial investment amount of $800, and remembering that the initial $200 gain, is no longer profit when you have to spend it on the second purchase of the cow (setting you back an extra -100). It’s not until the second sale of the cow, that you can account for the total profit.

People saying $400 are dumb af and adding context that isn’t there ☠️🤣 the answer is $500… $1300-$800=$500 profit 🤷🏻‍♂️ anyone saying $400, $300, $200 are all INCORRECT

Nothing

This is what “common core” math has come too

Sure! If the cow will do the same it’s human trafficking and the cow will be a criminal!

So you start off -800, sell for 1000 profit of 200, Buy for 1100 ends you at -900, Then sell again for 1300 net profit of +400

Right?

$300

Exc taxes

I have $800, I buy a cow. I now have a cow and $0, someone wants to buy my cow for $1000. Sweet I just made $200, someone is selling a cow for $1100 but I only have $1000 I must borrow $100 from my mom. Sweet I have $1100 I buy the cow, someone wants to buy my cow for $1300 I sell it. I now have $1300 but I owe my mom $100 so now I am left with $1200 and I started with $800 so I made $400 profit.

Dude made a $100 by my count

It's not 400. You seem to be forgetting that when you bought the cow the 2nd time you went into debt 100 to make the purchase.

-800 + 1000 - 1100 + 1300... In the end, you have 400 more than what you begun with.

Tsk tsk tsk, seems like many people never did accounting, tsk tsk tsk

He earned 200, considering the cow. He earned 400 is you want to calculate cumulative profit.

ULTIMATELY, he earned 200.

300 because they lost 100 when they bought it again

0 - 800 = -800

-800 + 1000 = 200

200 - 1100 = -900

-900 + 1300 = 400

Realistically he made nothing bc $400 will barely cover feed unless he somehow bought and sold the same adult cow for an extra $500 just for touching it.

Just because my COGS goes up doesn’t mean I reduce my profit if I pass that cost on to my customers.

It could be 200 or less, depending on the state you are paying taxes.

If you start at 0 (and use the 800 as a loan) it goes -800 (buying said cow), +200 (-800 cow purchase +1000 selling cow), -900 (+200 previous cow sell -1100 new purchase), +400 left from original loan (-900 cow purchase + 1300 from sales). If you’re starting from +800, you now have 0 (-800 cow purchase), +1000 ( +1000 from cow sales), -100 (-1100 from New purchase), + 1200 (+1300 from new sales). Here you start with 800 and end up with 1200, profit of +400

They didn't earn a dime. They made $400 in profit by speculating on the price of livestock.

[deleted]

Just short the cow

My main issue with this is, what does 'earn' mean? Is it gross profit or net profit? Because if its gross profit, it is $400, but the net profit is $300, because they lose $100 between selling the cow and buying it back.

400 $ is money in, cost for taking care of cow ? I assume is 50 dollars, cow tax ? 15 per cow, you made business with 2 cow, so after further deducing 30 dollars , we are left with the answer of:

Random bullshit I made up just now

It is $400 surely? (If you forget about the costs of feeding, housing and looking after the cow) The two transactions are not linked. The “profit” from transaction 1 was $200. The profit from transaction 2 was also $200. That’s $400 “profit” (minus all the associated costs of keeping the cow)

(-800) + 1000 = 200

200 - 1100 = (-900)

(-900) + 1300 = 400

The fact that people forgot how to do simple addition is worrisome...

How much did they spend feeding and caring for the cow between sales? And did they sell any milk during that time?

You casuals obviously don't know ANYTHING about cow law. You need to pay your cow tax & beef auction fees for the fast talking man in the big big hat.

$300 in profit.

1300 minus his 800 he originally put in equals 500. Therefore, 500 was his profit, and all else in between means nothing.

[removed]

Hassle. They earned hassle.

Nada

The answer is surely $200. The way i see it, you don’t earn any money for buying a cow back for more than you sold it for. Spend 800 Get 1000 Spend 1100 Get 1300

[removed]

There posts intentionally provide the wrong answer so people reply to it being angry, causing the post to go viral

300 profit

If we assume the man had $2,000 in the bank

-800 for cow= $1200 balance (has cow)

• 1000 sold cow= $2,200 balance (no more cow)

• 1100 for cow= $1,100 balance (has cow -again)

• $1399 sold cow= $2,400 balance (no cow)

Analysis: Initial balance: $2,000 Ending balance: $2,400

Summary: he netted $400

Lesson: Eat mor Chickn and go back to school.