Confusing question

[Mr Kobayashi]

Is there not an example in case law?

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Is there not an example in case law?

There is, but the case was stolen and the law was left.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Is the correct answer.

You have to concentrate on what the store has actually lost in monetary terms.

The issue is something I come across at work lots of times. I've done lots of IT work involving data and reporting and it all depends how you define "lost".

The cash part is easy; the thief has walked out with £30. But the problem comes when you think about the other £70 of goods stolen.

My definition of "lost" involved what it would cost to get back to the situation the shopkeeper was in before the theft, which involves the wholesale cost of replacing the stolen goods.

But it could also be defined as the profit margin lost on those goods. If that was £40 then he's "lost" £70 overall, which is the £30 cash plus the £40 opportunity cost of not having those items to sell.

Or, as @Coatigan defined it, £100 being the lost cashflow from those goods, which was the full £70, plus the £30 cash.

I gave a presentation to some of my colleagues last week that I've given previously a few times and I use the example of an insurance broker selling a motor policy via an aggregator like Money Supermarket or Go Compare and the buyer choosing to pay by instalments while also adding Legal Expense and Breakdown cover.

You pay one amount but it's split in several ways between all the various parties, including IPT, with the broker retaining the rest, including any interest they earn on the instalments. So you have to be able to record, track and report on all that accurately.

 

[Coatigan]

The issue is something I come across at work lots of times. I've done lots of IT work involving data and reporting and it all depends how you define "lost".

The cash part is easy; the thief has walked out with £30. But the problem comes when you think about the other £70 of goods stolen.

My definition of "lost" involved what it would cost to get back to the situation the shopkeeper was in before the theft, which involves the wholesale cost of replacing the stolen goods.

But it could also be defined as the profit margin lost on those goods. If that was £40 then he's "lost" £70 overall, which is the £30 cash plus the £40 opportunity cost of not having those items to sell.

Or, as @Coatigan defined it, £100 being the lost cashflow from those goods, which was the full £70, plus the £30 cash.

I gave a presentation to some of my colleagues last week that I've given previously a few times and I use the example of an insurance broker selling a motor policy via an aggregator like Money Supermarket or Go Compare and the buyer choosing to pay by instalments while also adding Legal Expense and Breakdown cover.

You pay one amount but it's split in several ways between all the various parties, including IPT, with the broker retaining the rest, including any interest they earn on the instalments. So you have to be able to record, track and report on all that accurately.

The only issue here is, it is a simply trick question, and many have fallen for the trick. A more successful murkier version of the 'missing pound' riddle or the 'motel debt' one, but in essence the same thing, a few words to send people on irrelevant tangents.

The loss, in monetary, philosophical, logical, linnear, circular, conceptual, 3 dimensional, 4 dimensional, and time-flow, and once again monetary terms, is Always £100, hence that is the only correct answer.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

The only issue here is, it is a simply trick question, and many have fallen for the trick. A more successful murkier version of the 'missing pound' riddle or the 'motel debt' one, but in essence the same thing, a few words to send people on irrelevant tangents.

The loss, in monetary, philosophical, logical, linnear, circular, conceptual, 3 dimensional, 4 dimensional, and time-flow, and once again monetary terms, is Always £100, hence that is the only correct answer.

CFMOF

 

[Barcon]

This thread reminds me of this:

showthread.php

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The only issue here is, it is a simply trick question, and many have fallen for the trick. A more successful murkier version of the 'missing pound' riddle or the 'motel debt' one, but in essence the same thing, a few words to send people on irrelevant tangents.

The loss, in monetary, philosophical, logical, linnear, circular, conceptual, 3 dimensional, 4 dimensional, and time-flow, and once again monetary terms, is Always £100, hence that is the only correct answer.

Being dogmatic doesn't equate to being right.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Being dogmatic doesn't equate to being right.

But you do see two sides to this, do you not?
Surely there is a difference between the €70 returned to the till being registered as payment for goods and not being registered as payment for goods.
Not registered as payment means he stole 30 cash and 70 stock.
Registered as payment means the goods were paid for, the same as any other goods paid for that put the 100 into the register in the first place.
That 100 that the till is now light.

Oui ou non.

 

[Coatigan]

Being dogmatic doesn't equate to being right.

No. But being right lets me be dogmatic.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

A man steals £100 from a shop’s cash register
He then carries on round the store and picks up £70 worth of goods
He goes to the checkout , pays for the goods with the stolen money and leaves the store with £70 worth of goods and £30 in cash

How much has the store lost?

Event -------------------------------------------------------------- Store's Loss thus Far
Man steels £100 from the store's cash register ------------- £100
Man collects £70 of goods from the store ------------------- £170
Man pays for stolen goods -------------------------------------- £170 - 70 = £100
======
The store has lost £100.