Riddle

[GT98]

I got this in an email..

Three men went to a motel. The man behind the desk said the room is $30, so each man put up $10 each and went to the room. A little while later he realized the room was only $25, so he sent the bellhop back to the 3 guys room with $5. On the way to the room the bellhop couldn't figure how to split the $5 between the 3 guys so he just gave each one of them $1 and he kept the other $2. That left the 3 guys paying $9 each for the room. 3x9=27+ the 2 that the bellhop kept =$29. WHERES THE OTHER DOLLAR??????

[GT98]

I think its because the 5 dollars wasn't divided up equally into 3's

[cjolley]

You can't subtract the $3 that went to the 3 men and add the $2 that went to the bell hop to anything and get a relevant number.

10 + 10 + 10 = 30

or 9 + 9 + 9 - 2 + 5 = 30

and
10 + 10 + 10 - 5 = 25

or 9 + 9 + 9 -2 = 25

[lowlifecat]

there is no missing dollar

you cannot add the 2$ the clerk kept to the 27$ because it is already included in the ammount the 3 men payed.

thus the 9x3=27 includes the 2$ the clerk kept.

[gt40]

They only spent $27 total, as 3x9=27
25 for the room and 2 for the bell hop.

[ZokesPro]

30$ a room, with a 5$ rebate come to 25$ a room. Divide that by 3 and that makes 8.33$, so technically it comes to 24.99$ cause the room actually costs 29.99$ even though it's advertised at 30$. So 29.99$ divided by 3 is 9.99$ and the company makes profit off the fraction due to sneaky accounting tactics cause 9.99$ times 3 is 29.97$. So technically they each paid 9.99$ but actually paid 10$ each. Then the owner tells the butler that they get a 5$ rebate. So now the total comes to 24.97$, but advertised at 25$ now cause of a 5$ rebate, which they should have been advised cause now they can sue the butler for theivery cause the butler is a greedy dishonest thief and keeps 2$ to himself making the new total to 27.97$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate. Divide that by 3 and now they each technically paid 9.32$. So basically they each got back 0.66$ from the butler and the butler ends up keeping the extra two pennies cause you can only split 1.98$ in three when dealing with cold hard cash. So technically the butler takes 2.02$ and the rooms cost 8.32$ a pop for three people advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate, but 8.32$ a piece only comes to 24.96$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate coming to a total of 25$ but they paid 10$ and got a 1$ reabte making the total at 28$ a room with a 3$ rebate.

Edit:

Let me re-think that.

30$ a room, with a 5$ rebate come to 25$ a room. Divide that by 3 and that makes 8.33$, so technically it comes to 24.99$ cause the room actually costs 29.99$ with a 5$ rebate even though it's advertised at 30$. So 29.99$ divided by 3 is 9.99$ and the company makes profit off the fraction due to sneaky accounting tactics cause 9.99$ times 3 is 29.97$. So technically they each paid 9.99$ but actually paid 10$ each. Then the owner tells the butler that they get a 5$ rebate. So now the total comes to 24.97$, but advertised at 25$ now cause of a 5$ rebate, which they should have been advised cause now they can sue the butler for theivery cause the butler is a greedy dishonest thief and keeps 2$ to himself making the new total to 27.97$ but that's according to the customer cause in fact it's actually 24.97$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate but because you have to divide it by 3 again, it's actually 24.96$ which makes the real total at 29.96$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate. I think that's right.

There's a riddle within the riddle cause you can't physically split 0.01$ into three although it really is possible but then the money no longer has any value.

[lowlifecat]

30$ a room, with a 5$ rebate come to 25$ a room. Divide that by 3 and that makes 8.33$, so technically it comes to 24.99$ cause the room actually costs 29.99$ even though it's advertised at 30$. So 29.99$ divided by 3 is 9.99$ and the company makes profit off the fraction due to sneaky accounting tactics cause 9.99$ times 3 is 29.97$. So technically they each paid 9.99$ but actually paid 10$ each. Then the owner tells the butler that they get a 5$ rebate. So now the total comes to 24.97$, but advertised at 25$ now cause of a 5$ rebate, which they should have been advised cause now they can sue the butler for theivery cause the butler is a greedy dishonest thief and keeps 2$ to himself making the new total to 27.97$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate. Divide that by 3 and now they each technically paid 9.32$. So basically they each got back 0.66$ from the butler and the butler ends up keeping the extra two pennies cause you can only split 1.98$ in three when dealing with cold hard cash. So technically the butler takes 2.02$ and the rooms cost 8.32$ a pop for three people advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate, but 8.32$ a piece only comes to 24.96$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate coming to a total of 25$ but they paid 10$ and got a 1$ reabte making the total at 28$ a room with a 3$ rebate.

ow my head!

[Mehen]

30$ a room, with a 5$ rebate come to 25$ a room. Divide that by 3 and that makes 8.33$, so technically it comes to 24.99$ cause the room actually costs 29.99$ even though it's advertised at 30$. So 29.99$ divided by 3 is 9.99$ and the company makes profit off the fraction due to sneaky accounting tactics cause 9.99$ times 3 is 29.97$. So technically they each paid 9.99$ but actually paid 10$ each. Then the owner tells the butler that they get a 5$ rebate. So now the total comes to 24.97$, but advertised at 25$ now cause of a 5$ rebate, which they should have been advised cause now they can sue the butler for theivery cause the butler is a greedy dishonest thief and keeps 2$ to himself making the new total to 27.97$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate. Divide that by 3 and now they each technically paid 9.32$. So basically they each got back 0.66$ from the butler and the butler ends up keeping the extra two pennies cause you can only split 1.98$ in three when dealing with cold hard cash. So technically the butler takes 2.02$ and the rooms cost 8.32$ a pop for three people advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate, but 8.32$ a piece only comes to 24.96$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate coming to a total of 25$ but they paid 10$ and got a 1$ reabte making the total at 28$ a room with a 3$ rebate.

Edit:

Let me re-think that.

30$ a room, with a 5$ rebate come to 25$ a room. Divide that by 3 and that makes 8.33$, so technically it comes to 24.99$ cause the room actually costs 29.99$ with a 5$ rebate even though it's advertised at 30$. So 29.99$ divided by 3 is 9.99$ and the company makes profit off the fraction due to sneaky accounting tactics cause 9.99$ times 3 is 29.97$. So technically they each paid 9.99$ but actually paid 10$ each. Then the owner tells the butler that they get a 5$ rebate. So now the total comes to 24.97$, but advertised at 25$ now cause of a 5$ rebate, which they should have been advised cause now they can sue the butler for theivery cause the butler is a greedy dishonest thief and keeps 2$ to himself making the new total to 27.97$ but that's according to the customer cause in fact it's actually 24.97$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate but because you have to divide it by 3 again, it's actually 24.96$ which makes the real total at 29.96$ advertised at 30$ with a 5$ rebate. I think that's right.

There's a riddle within the riddle cause you can't physically split 0.01$ into three although it really is possible but then the money no longer has any value.

You forgot tax.

[Mehen]

I think this thread should be deleted so the MURC seems less stupid. Or just keep the first post and GT40's

[KvHagedorn]

They only spent $27 total, as 3x9=27
25 for the room and 2 for the bell hop.

Eloquent, succinct, correct.

[ZokesPro]

I think this thread should be deleted so the MURC seems less stupid. Or just keep the first post and GT40's

N'ah, I like my explanation. It's complicated for nothing.

[cjolley]

See, and I like my explanation because it states the general case.