To think that this sum is super simple

[PeerieBreeks]

and can't understand how so many people on Facebook have it so completely wrong (and can justify it to themselves).

Without adding your reasoning, tell me what you think the answer is.

'He buys a horse'
'He sells the horse'
'He buys back the horse again
'He sells the horse'

Where is the implication of a second horse?

@alpine

That’s the point really. The misdirection is in mentioning that it is the SAME horse. If you think of it as two different horses then it doesn’t confuse the solution.

But the way it's written, it makes no sense for there to be two horses.

Where is the implication of a second horse?

There isn't one. Suggesting thinking of it as a second horse is an attempt to simplify the problem for people who can't see that the answer is 20.

It implies the same horse. So what is the point in thinking he still owns the first hose and is buying a second horse, when the question implies he loses the first horse and then buys it back?

It doesn't matter!

It just might be easier to work through it if you imagine a 2nd horse, sack of spuds, pair of shoes etc.

It is the thought of a single item that is the deliberate confusing factor. It is irrelevant but human nature means we are likely to feel continued ownership at the 2md transaction!

Please get 10 'somethings' and work it through!

Oh! Ok. God this really confused me

Well this is reassuring! On the BIDMAS/BODMAS thread I was rather worried about my sub Yr 6 calculation standard, but even I got $20!

I did it in my head, but if you’re struggling if you divide it into 2 columns, outgoings and income, it is crystal clear.

I think it might be a comprehension/reading issue rather than a maths one!

He made $10.

He made a profit of $10 in the end

Yes I see theoretically he has made $20 profit but.....surely when he buys back the horse at a higher price than he's sold that has to be balanced against something else to get a true overview of my day's profit

There is no theoretical about it. The profit is the profit! It might be balanced by his disappointment at not selling for 90 in the first place but that has no effect on the actual profit.

the question implies he loses the first horse and then buys it back? He doesn't lose it, he sells it for $10 profit.

The second purchase is completely separate! And he again makes a $10 profit.

I think that quite often with these things the issue is that people are looking for the 'trick' and so overthink it. I saw it, immediately realised it was $20, but then that was so simple that I went back and re-read it convinced I'd missed a catch. I realised I hadn't and I'm confident enough in my mathematical ability to know that the answer is therefore $20 - but I can see how someone less sure about it would then start overthinking it and coming up with the $10 answer.

alpineibex it doesn't matter that it's the same horse. The bit in the middle isn't a loss whether or not the horse is the same.

He buys a horse and sells it for 10 more.
He buys the horse again and sells it for 10 more.

So each time he comes out with 10 more than he spent. No need to worry about comparing how much he sold it for the first time to how much he bought it for the second time.

Shit at that too.
I ended up with £90 worth of 'things' at the end.

OK cross posted!

10 up

Oops! Sorry

$10 up

He has an extra 20 in his hand

But only 10 is profit

So what is the other 10 that he gains overall, if its not profit?

I make it $20.

Are you trying to patronise me DadDadDad

Even

How is anyone still getting 10 profit?

Add up the money he spent on the horse.
60 + 80 = 140.

Now add up the money he received for the horse.
70 + 90 = 160.

20 profit.

$20