Anti-humor or am I dumb?
Wednesday, 12 Mar 2025
Exclusive insights, data, and analysis for financial market experts.
Search
Have an existing account?
Sign In
The joke is that the OP of the original /r/mildlyinfuriating post is actually incorrect and they _did_ earn $400.
I keep telling everyone it results in a loss. Look for yourselves:
?width=471&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=883f2ff5a6e003184680f565f0db8d1d3db5be85
Ok I see a lot of people missing this for the same reason. I get the logic, but it’s wrong.
Some of you are adding the two profits from the sales together (400) then subtracting the 100 extra he paid for the second purchase to get 300. I hear you. This is incorrect, but I understand what you’re doing.
What you’re missing is that the difference between the original price of the cow (800) when bought is 500 less than the FINAL price it sold for (1300). Had there just been the one buy/sell like this, the profit would have been 500. However, that’s NOT what happened. The guy paid an extra 100 dollars on the cow during another purchase. That 100 comes out of the 500 he WOUKD HAVE MADE had it been just the one buy/sell. It does NOT impact the 400 actual profit; 400 is what he made when all of those differences are accounted for.
Hope this helps.
Edit: maybe one more way to explain it.
The question makes it the same cow the whole time to mess with you. That’s part of the trick. So ignore that part. It doesn’t matter.
Think of it like this. You own a store. You pay 800 for one piece of inventory and 1100 for another piece of inventory. You sell the first for 1000 and the second for 1300. You’ve made 200 on each. Your total profit is 400.
The question is designed to fool you into trying to account for the difference between 1000 and 1100 by using the same cow. However, that’s just smoke and mirrors. Treat it like two different cows and it’ll make sense.
Teacher Peter here. The key to this answer is the final sentence “How much did I earn?”
Their starting balance was never discussed and is irrelevant. They spent $800 of their own money and received $1000 for the investment. That it $200 in profit. Later they then purchased the same investment back for $1100 and received $1300 for it. That’s another $200. That is $400 in total earnings. A math equation is unnecessary.
Teacher Peter out.
Its $400. U made $200 the first time (1000-800) and $200 the second time (1300-1100).
It’s easy to calculate. Let’s assume all I have is 800$.
———————————————————–
So I bought a cow for 800$
**0$ in the wallet, 1 cow**
———————————————————–
Sold a cow for 1000$
**1000$ in the wallet, 0 cows**
———————————————————–
I bought a cow for 1100$
**I’m 100$ in debt, so -100$, 1 cow**
———————————————————–
I sold cow for 1300$
I was 100$ in debt so I have 1200$
———————————————————–
Summary. I started with 800$, and now I have 1200$. I made a profit of 400$.
So, how could someone get it wrong? Easy, they are stupid. Reading comments, someone pointed out that 3rd transaction would be impossible without having 900$ and not 800$. But that just shifted amount of cash I have by 100$, so
900$ initially
100$ after the first transition
1100$ after second.
0$ after the third.
1300$ after fourth.
That still means we move from 900$ to 1300$ so it’s still 400$. The argument makes no sense.
-1900 + 2300 = 400
after a lot of work, the guy made $400 on a cow.
I have $800
I buy $800 cow (0 gain)
I sell cow for $1000 ($200 gain)
I now have $1000
I buy cow with $1000 cash and $100 in debt ($100 loss)
I sell cow for $1300
I now have $1300 and $100 in debt
I pay off debt
I now have $1200
Since I started with $800, my profit is $400.
Some people just need to go back to school.
?width=2460&format=png&auto=webp&s=6b13d4d683a043eaeaff9e39a835aa7c57594a9f
Either that or the IRS is involved.
It *is* $400. The joke is that some people are just horrible at math.
Well, after the first time selling it you would have 200 bucks, afterward, by buying it for 1100, you are now 900 in debt, by selling it again for 1300, you would now have 400 bucks, is this math right,?
It took me a solid minute to understand how it’s 400 but basically, a lot of people including myself were subtracting 100 from the final profit due to the guy buying the cow for 100 more than what he bought it for, but this doesn’t affect the final profit
They made 200 off each buy-sell, so 400. Its really not that complex.
I’m getting $300 profit am I cooked
God I took this post way too seriously. Y’all need a financial literacy class
buy cow: (0-800) = -$800
sell cow: (-800 + 1000) = $200
buy cow: (200 – 1100) = -$900
sell cow: (-900 + 1300) = $400
Earnings: $400
I don’t get it.
Let’s say I have 900 in a bank account
I take out 800 to buy a cow, turn around and sell it for 1000, somehow.
Now I have $1000 in hand, and $100 in a bank account.
I buy the cow for 1100, so now I’m broke, but I have a cow.
I sell the cow for 1300, and deposit everything into the bank
I started with 900, now I have 1300 – $400 profit.
They earn 400 dollars wtf
OP was wrong. It’s 400.
It’s just addition (money made when cow is sold) and subtraction (money paid when cow is bought). That’s it. There’s no magic formula. Just adding two numbers, and subtracting two numbers.
Less than $400 because you didn’t charge sales tax, and the government is now knocking for their portion.
Gross Earnings were 2300 but net profit was 400. Technically they used the word “earn” which in laymen’s terms could be either.
You start off in deficit since your paying 800.
They earned zero cows which is actually a profit because cows are terrible.
Bought it for 800:
Balance = -$800
Sold for $1000:
Balance = $200
Bought for $1100:
Balance = -$900
Sold for $1300
Balance = $400
Or just net loss = $800 + $1100 = $1,900
Net gain = $1000 + $1300 = $2,300
$2300 – $1900 = $400
As there is no “I had X dollars to start”, assume you have $0 at the start of the problem, thus sending you into debt 800 dollars.
((−800+1000)−1100)+1300 does indeed equal 400
As u/zani1903 put it, the joke is that OOP is wrong.
Ignore the cow and the again and all the text.
Buy 800 means -800
Sell 1000 means +1000
You’re at a 200 profit. Done.
Next day.
Buy 1100 means -1100
Sell 1300 means +1300
You’re at a 200 profit. Done
Profit over both days/transactions is 200+200
The original OP on the left is so confidently incorrect that he has penguin guy on right gaslit to thinking 200+200 isn’t actually 400
The thing people are getting twisted is that he ‘lost’ potential profit because he sold at 1000 and bought it back at 1100. So they’re mistakenly subtracting the difference of 100 from his profit, but that is already accounted for if you just stick to basic debits and credits. If he never sold the first time, and only held on to it until he could sell for 1300, he would have a profit of 500.
There’s some long explanations going on here. He made an investment that earned him 200 bucks. He made a second investment that earned him another 200 bucks. He made 400 bucks. The “joke” is the over complication people make for a pretty simple problem (and the original poster not getting it right).
it is 400 profit overall
So my take is the person had $800, bought cow. Now at $0. Sold cow now has $1000, bought cow again at $1100 putting them into overdraft of -$100 then sold it for $1300. That puts his account balance at $1200 with a total increase from $800 equalling $400 in profit. He bought low, sold high twice.
IRS would tell you $400 and that’s the only math I care about when it comes to my short term taxable gains on my cow flipping side hustle.
So
-800+1000 -1100 +1300 =+400
How can it be other solution
Three travelers are tired after a long day of sightseeing so they decide to get some rest at a motel.
When they enter the motel lobby, the new night manager says “It will be 30 bucks for a room.”, so the travelers pony up $10 each to reach the $30.
The next morning, the day manager discovers the new night manager forgot to give the group the late check-in discount of $5 off, equalling $25 a room.
So the day manager instructs the bellhop to take the men $5 in refund money.
On the way to the room the bellhop asks himself how he will split $5 between three people, so he pockets $2 and gives each traveler a dollar, saying the total was 27 dollars for the night.
So each traveler paid $9 for the room. 9×3=27 dollars
The bellhop pocketed $2. 27+2=29 dollars?
29?
WTF?
Where did the last dollar go?
-800+1000 = $200 profit
-1100+1300 =$200 profit
Technically can be seen as profiting off the same item for a total of $400 over the period of owning it.
However when you’re reading it it’s more logically to think the first time you bought it you made a $200 profit. If you then turned around bought it again you’ve technically invested $100 of your initial $200 profit in hopes to sell it again for another profit and by luck you sold it again for a $200 profit. It still boils down to you’ve made $400 technically off the same item as the $100 increase isn’t devaluing the item In question. But it would be fairer to say that, what jack ass would do this with a cow.
You have 10 000 at the start.
9200 after buying the cow
10 200 after selling
9100 after buying again
10 400 at the end.
10 400 – 10 000 = 400.
Net Income or Profit = Revenues – Expenses
$400 = (1000+1300) – (800 + 1100)
Source: CPA
I think the oop might think the real profit is .5k since, buying is .8k and final selling is 1.3k .
Which obviously does equal a difference of .5k, but oop might have been neglecting the .1k investment in the middle of the holding period.
In fact, if we simply look at these transactions from a financial perspective it’s easy to breakdown.
“- 800 | + 1000”
“- 1100 | + 1300”
“============”
“- 1900 | + 2300”
=> 2300 – 1900 = 400.
Ya know I was about to come in here and say that a lot of people are making wild assumptions with starting cash and what not but honestly it doesn’t matter because even assuming you start with $0 you still get $400.
$0 0 cow
-$800 1 cow
$200 0 cow
-$900. 1 cow
$400. 0 cow
So ya the main humor is the original tweet either not doing the math right or intentionally trying to stir up a battle on whether it’s $400 or not.
1) -800
1000-800 =200
2) 1000 = +200
1100-1000 =-100
3) 1100 = -100
1300-1100-100=100
4) 1300 = 100
What seems to trip people up is that it’s the same cow.
That doesn’t matter. It could be the same cow, different cow, a horse, or a pokemon card.
2 transactions, each netted +$200. Period.
wait i think it’s a trick it’s not 300. 1000 – 800 = 200 – 1100 = -900 + 1300 = 400, it’s because this isn’t a math equation in the traditional sense
The real answer is that you didn’t *earn* anything. You extracted $400 from the market by controlling a portion of the cow supply.
They earned a total of $2,300 but made a profit of $400
1000-800 = 200 profit
200-1100 = -900
-900+1300 = $400
Bought for 800(profit: -800) Sold for 1000(profit:200) bought for 1100(profit:-900) Sold for 1300( Total Profit: 400)