5 Hard Riddles With Simple Answers 👉 Tricky Hardest Riddles with Answers || Episode #5

[@sachinkumarbit07]

For question number 4... We can say that....we have 5 tyres each with 20000km running capacity...total 100000km running capacity...but we need 4 tyres at a time...so it's 100000/4= 25000kms

[@nishantbrain]

What is we had six tyres

[@sachinkumarbit07]

@@nishantbrain same 20000*6=120000 divide with 4 that is 30000

[@Dalesmanable]

The answer to Q1 is not three spots - it is just the poster’s preferred one from several possible answers. For example, four spots is equally valid as an answer: the dice are in sets of 3, the third being the first rotated through 90 degrees then superimposed on the second, giving the answer as 4 spots rotated onto 4 spots, the superimposed image being four spots. There may be other languages where the letters match up for 1-5 but not the sixth.

[@gauravmaheshwari1807]

There's also a possible scenario that numbers are like 3 3 5 4 4, so the next number can even be a 6

[@tinahalder8416]

I also thought that super imposing answer

[@Le-Cardinal]

Occams Razor says that you ignore complex answers in favour of simple answers

[@robrazzano9168]

The answer to the first question is 6 based on the arithmetic pattern. In order for three to be an acceptable answer, you have to assume that the interviewee speaks English.The answer to the second question could be 1 if you consider the "number of cuts" to be the number of times I squeeze the bolt cutter, as I could stack the four small chains atop one another and make one cut simultaneously through the end of all four chains.

[@you123321uoy]

he lost his faith in indian rupee notes

[@saurabhbhalla90]

Bitcoin

[@VivekKumar-hw6zq]

Yes becoz guy was not an indian... He may be from lubu lulu island 🏝

[@parthmaheshwari2328]

No because in question there is "Rs" as a unit of money is written!

[@jacoboribilik3253]

The last problem is not confusing as long as we define properly what we mean by loss. I'm no accountant but in cash terms the shopkeeper lost 800 and in terms of goods the bag. If we covert everything into cash he lost 1000. In terms of bags: 5 bags. There's really no mistery to it once you are clear as to what you are refering to.

[@justfrankjustdank2538]

was bouta leave the same exact comment basically, good job hitting the nail on the head lol

[@eatstreet8074]

1)Bag loss=200rs 2)Lady taken away cash = 800rs 3)He return 1000rs with adding 200 he had after change given to lady tha means =800 200+800+800=1800

[@69Turnips]

Just 1000. At the end of the day that's all he has to pay back. The bag was paid for when he got the change

[@mikkomahonen5050]

As John said, 1000. Lady got 200rs bag and 800rs cash = 1000 Next door shop keeper lost nothing. So the shop keeper could not lose more than 1000rs Starting point: Shop keeper has a bag = 200rs after purchase they have 200rs After returning 1000rs they have -800rs and since they doesn't have bag anymore it adds up -200rs =-1000rs = loss of 1000rs.

[@Bitsar]

I think answer is 2000......because shopkeeper gives 800 ruppees to lady + 200 ruppee bag+ exchange of 1000 ruppee

[@Talemir]

@@Bitsar but he gives 800 rp to woman and takes 200rp to pocket thats why 1800

[@muhitislam1939]

Idiot

[@hewazangana]

Q4) Can be solved easier. 100,000 is the distance can be covered by all tires. 4 is the number of tires you can use at any time. 100,000/4 = 25,000

[@jharealisticfantastic5112]

this answer is useful if you are going to use your car with just 1 tire at a time.

[@hewazangana]

Jarell Ibabao No, that would be 100,000

[@jharealisticfantastic5112]

Hahaha, you can't use your car with just one tire, so you need to use 4 tires at the same time.

[@hewazangana]

Jarell Ibabao Exactly, could you explain to me how my answer is wrong? My answer goes: 20,000 (Maximum distance per tire) * 5 = 100,000 (Total distance covered by all tires) 100,000 / 4 (Maximum allowable tires) = 25,000 (Maximum distance covered by the five tires)

[@arjunbadhan2685]

Nice explaination hewa..

[@freddymintarja2186]

The Q1 has multiple correct & logical answers even if options aren't offered, depending on how people looked at it. One: just like in the video. Two: pattern, 3,3,5,4,4,6. Three: opposite dice. In dice, the opposite dots should equal to 7, so the last one could also be a 2.

[@FireWingsNoLeadsNoLimits]

I would say 1000 is the correct answer Explaination:- 1. Let's count what he received 1000rs fake note - Value 0rs 1000rs change - value 1000rs Iska pocket mai 1000rs hai abhi 2. Let's count what he lost 200rs bag 800rs change 1000rs change to next shopkeeper for fake note Total amt - 2000rs So let's count the total loss 1000-2000= 1000rs

[@taarezameenpar3832]

Why you subtract 1000

[@FireWingsNoLeadsNoLimits]

@@taarezameenpar3832 See bro, I will simplify for you. Jo change dusra shopkeeper se leke aaya wo settlement ho gaya, So there no profit, no loss. Whatever he lost was only to that lady which was value of 1000(200rs bag+800rs change). So loss is 1000 - Simple Wo fake note ka value 0 hai, so wo fake note ka baat dimag se hatado

[@wouterdobbelaere]

He basically gave away the bag + 800 to the lady. So that makes 1000 loss. From the next shop he received 1000 and gave back 1000 eventually. So no net loss there. So the answer is 1000

[@noodle_fc]

No, because the 800 he gave in change was never his. He exchanged a 1000-rupee note (which wasn't his and cost him nothing) for smaller notes. He kept 200 and the counterfeiter took the other 800. When the shop next door came to take back their money, the shopkeeper only has Rs. 200 to give. The other 800 is riding in the purse of the counterfeiter. The shopkeeper suffers the loss of Rs. 200 which he received as payment for the bag. The shop next door suffers a loss of Rs. 800, unless they can catch the crook.

[@davidhitchen5369]

@@noodle_fc But It says that the other shopkeeper took his money back. I think we are supposed to assume it came out of the till of the shopkeeper who took the phony bill.

[@noodle_fc]

@@davidhitchen5369 If he had 800 already in his till why go next door to break the 1000? "His money"-800 of which the customer has carried away. I dunno, it seems to me if the answer is 1000 it's nothing but a math problem, and not a difficult one, either. Why call that a riddle when it's indistinguishable from any word problem in a 10-year-old's textbook? Have you heard the riddle about the bus that picked up four passengers at the first stop, then picked up another three while one got off at the second? It's a real brain-melter. :/

[@michaelwarren2391]

Except that he gave the lady Rs. 800 of that. (Edit) - I was wrong. Got fooled by the zero sum transaction with the neighboring shop.

[@davidhitchen5369]

@@noodle_fc Suppose he only had 1000's. I think you bring up a good point though. The question is somewhat ambiguous because it doesn't say how this is handled. I free very confident saying the net loss is $1,000. I'm not confident how it is disbursed among the victims. The net gain for the thief was $800 cash + $200 merchandise.

[@ankitsurolia8692]

Yeah 1000, u can easily understand this if u assume that the shopkeeper already had the change

[@smj735]

Ankit Surolia bro you are forgetting about the 800 which he gave to lady and the total will be 1800

[@HarinathSrinivas]

@@smj735 that is not his loss, he cheated the next shop by giving fake rs and getting money. So his loss is only 1000. With a 1000 fake note u can only lose 1000 rs if you don't have any profit for ur items.

[@rohitbasutkar8888]

U guys are forgetting about the bag which he gave....it was worth 200

[@nitingupta7105]

The total loss is 1000 Rs , because he returned 800Rs to the lady and 200 Rs for the item that she bought.Total loss- 800+200=1000..........

[@timelapse4989]

The shopkeeper tracks down the lady and took matters at his own hands and got the bag back with some blood stains plus the 800 with interest.

[@Torq123]

Rs 1000 is the correct answer. Consider the note was real then his profit is Rs 0. As the 1000 rupees note is fake, so he needs to compensate the this from his pocket.. So the compensation is Rs 1000 which interprets that the total loss is Rs 1000...

[@muralidharanm2005]

What about his bag.. so +200

[@KemosabeTBC]

@@muralidharanm2005 He got payed with real money for the bag, he has to give back that money (200) plus 800 from his own money. So he loses the bag and 800 = 1000

[@sehwagmass5245]

Simple... Loss to the shopkeeper = Profit to that Lady She took 200 worth goods & also she received 800 rs change... So the Loss to shopkeeper is Rs. 1,000

[@kostream2577]

Plus another person take 1000 Rs that also lose

[@eashanjindal]

No he also earned 200₹ from the lady

[@gurmeetaashat1453]

Eashan Jindal that's why shopkeeper lost 1800rs only

[@bigSwigsofGuinness]

Eashan Jindal no, he can’t earn 200 if the note was fake. The lady gave him zero, he gave the shop keeper zero, the shop keeper gave him 1000. He gave 800 to Lady 200 to self. But hasn’t cost him anything at this stage as he got the 1000 for free. He gave the neighbor a 1000. So he’s 1000 down, plus cost of bag... 1200

[@KemosabeTBC]

@@bigSwigsofGuinness He did earn 200 from the bag because that was real money from the other shopkeeper. He gave a bag worth 200 to the lady plus 800 from the other shopkeeper. He now has to give back the 200 he earned (effectively losing the bag) plus 800 from his own pocket. Total loss of 1000

[@v.i.psuraj6912]

Shop-1000 Lady-800 Bag-200 Total-2000

[@advancedacademy804]

1000

[@HariPrakashrrm6]

2000

[@marvinkitfox3386]

4:54 "The boy from the shop comes , saying its a fake note" Report the boy to the police, he obviously pocketed the real one, and substituted one of his own fakes! It the note was fake, then he would have seen it during the exchange. As would the bag shopkeeper, they always keep a very good eye out for fake notes.

[@bharatgudla5428]

☺️

[@shumbathkumar]

So the shopkeeper lost only ₹1000

[@bavithak3107]

Yess

[@oz2166]

1200 he also loss the bag worth Rs200.

[@the_superstar9558]

​@@oz2166 Bt He Got 200 For The Bag Already Loss Of 1800 Is Correct

[@shamalvaidya1196]

An analogy of the principle of conservation can be used to solve the last question. The buyer came with a fake note, so it can be considered as 0 rupees, and she left with a bag as well as 800 rupees. So she gained 1000 rupees worth in total. The second shopkeeper gave 1000 rupees and received 1000 rupees at the end. So he can be considered as the neutral observer. So the gain of the buyer must be equal to the loss of tge shopkeeper. Loss= 1000

[@harshshah1100]

The lady got 1000 benifit (200 RS bag and change of 800) it means shopkeeper gave 1000 rs to lady and he have to give 1000 Rs to the next shop against the fake 1000Rs not, so Shopkeeper actual loss is 2000 Rs

[@9adam4]

You're double-counting the money. The original 200 and 800 bills didn't come from the shopkeeper, so he doesn't lose them twice.

[@lawerenceburch6650]

Shopkeeper bought the bag for -200, exchanged 1000 for +200 and 800 change so net 0 profit. Reimburses other shopkeeper for -1000 loss, and so -200 cost of bag plus -800 the change given, is all the shopkeeper lost

[@debasismuduli5010]

The shopkeeper will have a total loss of 1200 200+800 to pay the another shopkeeper And the bag worth 200

[@KemosabeTBC]

@@debasismuduli5010 He only lost 1000, he did not pay the other shopkeeper with his money

[@ahmadaldulaie7604]

He lost 1000, Here's how: - He gave the lady a bag worth 200 (-200) His net money = -200 - She gave him fake notes (+0) His net money = -200 - He gave the shopkeeper the fake money (-0) and got 1000 (+1000) His net money = 800 - He gave the lady 800 in cash (-800) His net money = 0 - The shopkeeper demanded his 1000 back (-1000) His net money = -1000 So, his net loss is 1000 Another way to think about it: - He took 1000 from the shopkeeper and gave it back: net gain/loss from shopkeeper = 1000 - 1000 = 0 - He gave the lady 200 as a bag, and 800 in cash. net gain/loss from the lady = -200 - 800 = -1000 So his net gain/loss = -0 (from shopkeeper) - 1000 (from the lady) = -1000

[@dannybenalcazar2625]

i'm pretty sure is 1800, first -200 from the bag, then -800 from the change, then he is left with 200 but those 200 go towards the 1000 but he still needs 800 to give those 1000 back. so in retrospect -200, -800, -800 = -1800

[@ahmadaldulaie7604]

@@dannybenalcazar2625 I already calculated the -800, along with with the bag (-200) it becomes -1000. You calculated the -800 twice. Yes, you gave him back 1000 and gave the lady 800 in cash so thats 1800. but don't forget that he gave you 1000 in cash. so -1000 + 1000 cancel out. and you are left with -800 and -200 from the bag

[@rockerscrew6212]

He gave the lady Rs200 bag and Rs800 return for a fake note i.e for free.It means he lost Rs1000 there. Now he has 200 but he has to give 1000 back to beside shopkeeper i.e he added his own 800 with 200 he has. Totally 1800. I think so....if it was wrong plz correct me guys

[@ahmadaldulaie7604]

@@rockerscrew6212 You didn't take into account that he gained 1000 from the shopkeeper, when he gave him fake notes (he lost 0). in your comment, you said "i.e he added his own 800..." so you answered yourself here. he only added his "own" 800 (he lost only 800 in cash). and you said "with 200 he has". well how did he magically get that 200? Because he gained 1000 from the shopkeeper, and lost 800 to the lady, thats why he has 200. the 800 was deducted from the shopkeeper money, not from his own. he only lost 800 from his own cash + lost 200 as a bag. therefore, he lost 1000 in total

[@rockerscrew6212]

Aaaaaaaaa....s..I got it...tq bro...

[@FJT1978]

The answer to the last one is R1000. He lost no money in the change swap with the neighbor’s shop. He lost R200 goods and R800 cash to the lady. This is perfectly played out if you imagine the shop keeper started with R1000 cash in the drawer and R1000 goods. By the end the shopkeeper has $800 goods and R200 cash. Leaving him less by R1000 which is his total loss. (Which should be obvious since that’s the value of the counterfeit bill which the shopkeeper suffered the loss of )

[@koitsgaming2769]

Its 1000, he starts with 200 and ends with a debt of 800, the difference is 1000

[@kuls43]

It's not a math question, it's a logical question. Transaction would have been fair only unfair was the 1000 rupee note. And shopkeeper had to keep that note in the end. Therefore total loss of shop keeper will be 1000.

[@hina_rauf]

What about the money the boy from next shop takes ?? He takes his 1000 RS back.

[@hina_rauf]

Imagine shopkeeper starts with 1000 RS and 200 worth bag. He takes fake note and come back with real 1000 RS change gives 800 to lady and 200 worth of bag.So he loses 1000 here but he also gets to keep 200Rs change so his loss is of 800rs uptil now. But when the boy from next shop takes his 1000 RS back. So the total loss is 1800.Correct answer is E.1800

[@Araqius]

@@hina_rauf The correct answer is 1000.

[@wayne3340]

He got 1000 from the shop owner, who demanded it back, so he paid him back 1000. He gave the Lady a 200 bag, and 800 change. He is out, $1000.

[@wayne3340]

@@sirn. wrong Syed, it's 1000

[@wayne3340]

@@sirn. don't call people names Syed, respect for all. Of course it is his bag, it's stated in the beginning of the video.

[@sunilkumarg484]

@@sirn. The answer is 1000 Because, When shop keeper recieved a fake currency, then he has -1000 (since it's fake means it's loss for him) with him When he exchanged with next shop keeper now he has 1000(real bill) (and next Shop keeper now has lost -1000 ) , he will return 800 to customer then he has 200 with him, then next shop keeper came back and ask 1000 back so now he has 200-1000= -800 and -200 for selling a bag by taking fake bill and he got no profit at all So total loss is 1000

[@debasismuduli5010]

No, the answer will be 1200

[@debajyotichanda4741]

Ans is 1000 INR. Reason: After the shopkeeper exchanged the fake 1000 money, he had 1000 real note, then he returned 800 to the lady. So, his earning was 1000-800=200 real note. After the boy next shop demanded 1000 real note for the fake one, the shopkeeper had to take the fake 1000 note back and give back 200 real note (his earning from selling the bag) + 800 real note from his own pocket. So, his total loss = 200(earning from the bag) + 800 = 1000

[@jesseliverless9811]

Last puzzle: In a normal situation, the shopkeeper would have 1 less bag, and 200$(or R) in profit. But here, he still has 1 less bag, has lost 800$ for the money he gave back to the lady, and didn't get the 200$ profit. So overall a 1000$ loss.

[@bibekaryaal]

A loss of Rs. 1000 !! Let's condense the equation this way - The one who's neutral, the one who's on profit and the one who's on loss 1. The other shopkeeper gave the first shopkeeper 1000, then took back his 1000. So he's neutral. 2. The lady gave a fake note (Rs. 0) and took away Rs. 1000 (200bag + 1000). She got on profit of Rs. 1000. 3. The shopkeeper got no money from the lady, and gave goods worth Rs. 1000. A loss of Rs. 1000. To the other shopkeeper, he gave the money which he asked for earlier. Nothing tough

[@ivomollov3073]

Answer to the last question: Let's disregard the interaction between the two shopkeepers because the boy gave 1000$ and later took them back so no difference in capital. Since we know the note the lady gives is fake, we can assume she gives 0$. On the other hand, the shopkeeper gives her 1000$ real money, 200 in the form of the bag and 800 as "change" to the note that he received from her. The equation looks like this: 0 - 1000 = -1000

[@wayne3340]

Ivo you are right

[@stefdutoit8267]

Loss of a 1000 rupees. After the initial transaction there was no movement in his asset level since he did not sell it for a profit. But then he had to repay a 1000 rupees to the neighbour. But if you continue the story, he then hired an assassin for 500 rupees to track down the woman and reclaim the initial 1000 rupees as well as the handbag so all in all he would have lost 300 rupees. +1000 - 200 - 800 - 1000 - 500 + 1000 + 200 = -300

[@Ugarimpty]

T'as oublié que c'est le jour où il paye son loyer et qu'il dois racheter du sopalin.

[@MohdAadilMalik-sj5kd]

Assassin for 500 rs only !!!!!! Oh god it's so cheap gimme the contact no of him 😎

[@bharatvishalsharma354]

The money he took from other shop for change.. he returns that money back.. so that cancel each other.. so only loss in bag and 800 rupees.. -200 for bag +1000 from another shop -800 return to lady -1000 return to another shop *So Ans is 1000 rupees loss*

[@anerva8376]

dumbass it’s 1200, he already lost 200 on the profit of the bag, then another 1000 on the fake note

[@bakchodgamer2882]

Actual loss is 800 i was solved this problem in class ans is 800 rs loss to the shop keeper

[@Player_not_found]

@@bakchodgamer2882 If that's true you need a new teacher. He received 1000 from the other shop and gave 1000 back, so overall he lost both the 800 he gave the shopper and the bag, netting a total loss of 1000.

[@RDSingh-xc1ln]

कुल नुकसान = ? बैग की कीमत = -200 औरत को दिए = -800 पडोसी दुकानदार को दिए = -1000 नकली नोट की कीमत = 0000 कुल नुकसान = 2000

[@ramki9731]

The loss is 2000 for the shopkeeper

[@kshitijkumar8730]

1800 200 for bag, 800{(extra) given to boy to compensate 1000, 200 was with him from transaction with lady} , 800 to the lady

[@ChiruRider]

2000 I think

[@pandu2749]

Both of you wrong it is 1000

[@zebakhan5936]

2000 is the correct answer

[@pandu2749]

Wrong

[@aenzardion]

-200 bag +1000 from boy -800 change -1000 back to boy -200+1000-800-1000=-1000 1000 is the loss

[@satwik_dash]

@@aenzardion The +1000 that u wrote is the fake note

[@Scrollitnext]

1000 Shopkeeper had no loss or profit from the lady But gave 1000 from his own pocket😊

[@pandu2749]

Yes correct

[@vibhavwariku4280]

Sarthak Aggrawal correct. 1000 rs loss, as even after selling the bag he got 200 rs in return with no profit made on that exchange meaning simple exchange of goods (i.e. selling of bag doesn’t count for any profit or loss). But he had to give 1000 rs from his own pocket. Lady got a profit of 800 rs, shopkeeper got a loss of 1000 rs n the remaining 200 balance is what is the cash the shopkeeper got for the bag

[@shumbathkumar]

@@A7-iF 1000 is the correct

[@goguhu]

First is ‘4’ because adding the pips on the first two with one rotated 90 degree will be a ‘5’, but since ‘4’ are symmetric it will remain a ‘4’.

[@jdrenwick57]

But by that logic rotating the second and third dice then merging would give you 5 again so dice 4 should have been 5, and so would the 5th dice and so one for infinite.

[@JeramyRG]

Question 1- Entirely inconclusive. You can't just say your solution is right if there is multiple logical solutions. That's not the way this works. Question 2 - You're wrong. it's 2 cuts. Cut two pieces in half in one cut and make them completely new smaller links. Didn't say specify the links had to be equal length, nor did you specify the length of a cut - but you did allow for the parameters of bending and welding with no limit specifications. I. E. Ø (x2) = o o o o Question 3 - The answer is actually no logical answer exists. There is only one "6 shot revolver".. Even if all "6 shots" were fired, it would still only be one shot. No specification was made to the bullets within the revolver. I. E. Your answer is not properly formatted, but instead based on an assumption. Question 4 could've been explained much easier. Add all the tires maximum capacity, divide by the number of tires used at once. There is many ways to arrange the tires to reach maximum capacity - You failed to understand your own question. Question 5 - Has no logical response. We cannot determine the wholesale price of the bag or what he would've ultimately sold it for in any possible circumstance. Example: "Going out of business sale" We also do not know if he could've offloaded the bill to someone for a certain price. Basically the best answer with no assumptions is - The boy got 1,000 rps. Out of him, the woman got 800 and a indeterminately priced bag out of him while he received a fake 1,000 rps and possibly sold it for unknown amounts.

[@saynn9134]

Too try hard :D

[@JeramyRG]

@@saynn9134 I.E. Correct. Lol

[@samuelwilliams9371]

Then would Q2 be 1 cut? Cut one link straight down the middle length-ways to result in 6 halves, which can be used to link the other three together.

[@rangapriyad7869]

I guess it is thousand, as money gained=money lost, and the neighbor faces no gain/loss, the lady gets rs. 1000 gain(800 return of shop keeper, 200rs. Purse)= money lost by shopkeeper

[@traderskingdomm]

1000(800 change+200 bag's peice)+200(loss of bag)=1200

[@H13an5hu]

1. First , shoperkeeper goes to his next shopkeeper.(still think no lose). 2. He sell bag . ( Still think no profit / lose ). 3. Next shopkeeper came and get his original 1000 rupees (now lose 1000). 4. Coz he gives lady 1800 ruppee ( lose 1000+800= 1800). 5. He also gives to lady bag worth 200. ( Lose 1800 + 200 = 2000) So " lose = 2000"

[@ajaymishra7801]

Wrong explanation

[@ajaymishra7801]

Ri8

[@ajaykharb1284]

Here we apply law of conservation of money The another shopkeeper remain neutral as he had taken his money back. Lady get profit of 1000rs (200rs bag, 800rs returns). So loss of shopkeeper will be 1000rs equal to gain of lady

[@johnmcnair8854]

No because the lady walked away with 200+800 then he had to give next door back his 1000 so he lost 2000

[@joepiazza3756]

@@johnmcnair8854 John, the amount he lost is that 1000 he had to give back and only that. If that is hard to understand then assume the guy next door never noticed it was fake. In that case the guy who sold the bag does his normal transaction and at this time he breaks even since he sold the $200 bag at cost and has real $200 from the shop next door. The lady is +$1000 from the $200 bag plus $800 in real money she got in change. The shop next door is -$1000 because they gave the seller $1000 in real money for a fake. So seller is at $0 and Next door at -$1000 (And lady at +$1000). When the seller gives the shop $1000 for the counterfeit it's $1000 loss total, not $2000.

[@jiajitang]

For the last riddle if you think in this way: A very odd man wants a fancy counterfeit note in his collection. So he said to the woman hey how about I give you 800 plus a 200 worth bag in exchange for that fake bill you possess and the woman agreed. Then his yet another odd friend wants to hold a exhibition of counterfeit money. He borrowed that note from the first man with full 1000 deposit and later when the exhibition ends he returned the collection and got the deposit back. Both stories are equivalent. But from my version of the story you clearly see that the "odd man" spent 800 plus a bag worth 200 to obtain a fake bill which according to us, worth nothing. So he lost 1000.

[@sankarganesh2858]

I knew the answer but your explanation is awesome 👌

[@world69]

He kept 200 for the bag. So the loss is only 800.

[@sankarganesh2858]

@@world69 for easy way, see the profit ...she gain 200rs worth of handbag and 800rs balance...total profit for girl is 1000rs....neighbour shop keeper has no profit or loss...so this shop owner lost 1000rs

[@shahjamilohi8059]

U r wrong He lost 1800 As the note was fake he gave the lady extra 800 from his pocket Again the other shopkeeper took 1000 from him The only thing he got was that 200 which is actually the price of the bag so this is not any of his profit or loss Therefore ultimately he lost 1800

[@notski777notski3]

@@shahjamilohi8059 You forget that even tough the other shopkeeper takes 1000 from him he also gave him change for 1000. The correct answer is 1000 loss for the first shopkeep.

[@SarathRoyal777]

200 as a asset , 800 as change and 1000 as money for the fake note

[@kavitasingh2312]

loss is 1000rs as he gave the the lady 800rs+200rs bag since 800rs was of the boy from another shop and he has to return that 800rs to the boy and he has the 200rs,so the loss for him is only 800rs but he also lost a bag of 200rs therefore total loss is 800+200 which is 1000rs

[@ankitbisht4123]

The answer is 1000/- because a person given amt to other shopkeeper 1000/- , & his 200/- cost of bag was recovered by getting 200/- back.

[@reivajwinter4240]

He also lost 200 in assets from the lady

[@ankitbisht4123]

@@reivajwinter4240 Dear which asset? Means Bag.

[@gunjangohil6870]

2000 = 200 bag + 1000 to other shopkeeper and 800 to the lady back

[@saivicky4701]

Only 1000/- He returns 1000/- to other shopkeeper ... So lost only 1000/-. For bag-200/- For lady -800/- Think think... 😂😂

[@rohitbasutkar8888]

You are right coz he also gave change of 800 to the lady and the bag worth 200 as well + He returned 1000 rs to the other person as the note was fake So answer is 2000

[@tharundharmaraj9045]

Q no 4 is excellent

[@laurancetantony6265]

Simple Forget the fake bill and reframe the case as this. A 'lady' came in and took off with a bag worth Rs 200 and Rs 800 from the shelf. The spellbound keeper (shop) failed to react. Then what is his loss ? In the case of tyres, though each tyre runs 20000km, as four tyres are working together the effective efficiency of four tyres together is 20000km That means effective efficiency of a tyre is 5000km only. So five tyres gives an efficiency of 5 times 5000 means 25000

[@LOGICALLYYOURS]

Your reasoning for Fake note is perfect. However, for the car tyre problem, the approach of replacing tyres would be needed as a proof..... (of course, if the same is asked in an aptitude test, where you just need to tick an option, then your explanation is perfect.)

[@laurancetantony6265]

@@LOGICALLYYOURS than q

[@notski777notski3]

At firts I tought it was 1800, then I remembered tht I had forgot the loss of 200 rs worth bag so I thought 2000. Then I realized that 1000 counterfeit was basically like a loan so it doesn't count. So the answer is -800 + -200 worth bag = 1000

[@educational2164]

The loan was not returnable so that would be considered as loss

[@notski777notski3]

@@educational2164 And probably is in the billionaires club, but in concrete fact after the whole incident, he was down 1000 and no more.

[@deeptotop]

1000 the only gainer lady Shop owner looser 1000 Neighbouring shop no loss no gain

[@TheSkepticSkwerl]

Neighbor shop took back 1000. And he gave the lady a 200 bag. So 1200 loss.

[@abhishekks3037]

The shoopkeeper tookback 800 only to the lady so that he had 200 remains on hid hand. He compensates 800 from his hand along with the twohundred on his hand to the neighbour. So total loss is 800+200(cost of the bag) ie 1000rs

[@aenzardion]

@@A7-iF -200 bag +1000 from boy -800 change -1000 back to boy -200+1000-800-1000=-1000 1000 is the loss

[@aenzardion]

@@TheSkepticSkwerl -200 bag +1000 from boy -800 change -1000 back to boy -200+1000-800-1000=-1000 1000 is the loss

[@RahulKumar-re9er]

I would say 1000. 800 rupees loss of having to pay the other shopkeeper. And 200 rupees loss on the bag!

[@Anilkumar-ms4qy]

What do u think if i say 1200 he loses

[@Anilkumar-ms4qy]

I mean 1000 from th shop man and 200 bag...

[@harikrishna-cy1dt]

K

[@neteesan7053]

Right. See frm the ladys perspective. She simply exchanged her fake 1000 rs for bag and 800 rs cash which is her profit. Her profit is equal to sales mans loss. Answer is 1000 rs

[@petrkarlik6142]

His loss is 2000. He gave the lady bag worth 200. He gave the lady back 800. The boy took 1000.

[@sainitin9625]

Total loss would be ₹2000, shopkeeper has to return ₹1000 for his neighbour because the note which he gave was a fake note and the lady ran off with ₹200 worth bag and ₹800 change.So totally it's₹2000.

[@pryo2460]

It's 1800 coz he kept 200 with him

[@maheshnaidulalam4703]

1000 is not given to boy for free that get only this 1000back ....so only 1000with a women is loss for shopkeeper

[@Appathas]

last one: shopkeeper sells an item worth 200. (-200) shopkeeper receives fake 1000 bill (+0) shopkeeper goes to get change for fake bill (+1000) shopkeeper gives woman her change (-800) neighboring shopkeeper comes back for full value of counterfeit bill (-1000) so, totaling it all up, (-200) + (0) + (1000) + (-800) + (-1000) = (-1000) at least, that's how i think it works...

[@stevewilliams4239]

Real question is, how is the shopkeeper in business if he's not going to make a profit from selling a bag? 😂

[@hhadzimu]

Google "loss leader"

[@mdtalhaansari1096]

Perhaps clearing old stock to make room for new stock?

[@KrishnaDas-je3bz]

Total loss for shopkeeper is 2000. How? Lady carried a 1000 fake note and purchased 200 bag + in return taken 800 amount, total she benefited of 1000. The other shopkeeper came and said its a fake note and return back same to shopkeeper and taken the original note. There is no loss for the other shopkeeper. The shopkeeper sell 200 bag + 800 returned the remaining amount and given 1000 rupees to another shopkeeper. If my guess is correct the overall loss to the shopkeeper was 2000.

[@afzalkhan5312]

Wrong. He loss only 1000 thousand. Because another shopkeeper just give him 1000 as change and take his money 1000. So involvement of that shopkeeper is zero. Another shopkeeper is no profit no loss condition. So shopkeeper total loss is 1000.

[@sanaraja8099]

Now as for my perspective first of all the shopkeeper had made no profit from the bag he sold to the lady instead he took the fake note of 1000 rupees and got exchanged From the nearby shop where the shop man gave the shopkeeper 1000 rupees exchanged from his own money in small amounts Later the former sold the bag to the lady for 200 and gave her away 800 rupees thus he got no profit at all till this point and also no loss also but when the shop man came and asked for his 1000 rupee on account of the fake note thereby the bag shopkeeper having made no profit at all sadly had to pay 1000 rupees from his own pocket to the shop man Thus he incurred a total loss of 1000 rupees for himself Please like and comment about my explanational theory ☺☺

[@gouravchandel8107]

Brilliant ...👍

[@RoderickEtheria]

@@A7-iF You are wrong. The fake 1000 can never account for more than a 1000 loss. The loss moved to the second shop when the first merchant exchanged it for a real 1000. When the second shop came to collect, it moved the loss back onto the first shop.

[@deshbhaktdeshwasi2975]

@@A7-iF yes. U r right. According to me shop keeper incurred loss of Rs. 1800. This can be explained in another way. (1) lady took away from shop keeper : ( forget fake note for a moment) : Rs. 800 cash real notes and a bag worth Rs. 200 ( remember that Rs. 200 notes are still with shopkeeper. (2) now shop keeper has to repay Rs. 1000 in lieu of fake note. He pays that Rs. 200 which he got as selling price of bag + 800 from his pocket to nearby shopkeeper. Now what original shop keeper loses ? Rs. 200 bag price Rs. 800 paid to lady real .notes Rs. 800 paid to another Shopkeeper in lieu of fake note. Here, Rs. 800 , bcoz he already had Rs. 200 in his cash : Cost of bag sold. ___________ Rs. 1800 Total loss.

[@KemosabeTBC]

@@deshbhaktdeshwasi2975 Total loss is 1000 not 1800

[@aum1040]

It only takes one cut to make the loop. Just line up the four chains together, and cut the top loops of all four with a single cut.

[@vishnubhagavath6494]

2000rs loss, Because 1000rs is given to the boy from next shop. 800rs is given to the lady as balance. And a bag cost of 200rs (as in question says the shopkeeper sells with zero profit) Totally 2000rs loss.

[@aritramondal4010]

1800 loss . 200 for bag 800 to lady , 800 to give back next shop as he took those 200 for himself.

[@jasonsumpi1797]

I think yours the correct answer

[@visibletoanyone043]

Yes, it's correct

[@ankushrahate3066]

you are correct since he already got 200 for bag he just returned 800 and 1000

[@aryanaheriit-kgp5200]

Well Actually the Answer to the 1st question Can even be "B" by a different approach...:___ If pattern of 2 is rotated clockwise by 90° and merged in 1,the the resultant Pattern will be 3..in this manner if we perform The same with 4 and 5 then the Resultant Will the answer b..

[@stephenhousman6975]

Based on that logic, wouldn't the orientation between 1 and 2 be different? I was thinking of a different rotation pattern and got D then realized that it couldn't be that because the 3 dots would be in a different orientation.

[@johnmcmunn5698]

The most simplistic answer to the dice problem is 6. 5 is 2 more than the pair of 3s so 2 more than the pair of 4s would be 6 (D).

[@andril0019]

1st question my answer is right with the solution

[@yashomani]

Chain riddle was the best

[@WhiteTrash89]

Riddle 5 is A.200 loss. Shopkeeper has 0 money. Then has 200 that he keeps from getting change. Then loses 200 to the other shopkeeper. Only loses how much he spent on the bag, 200.

[@SamuelPearlman]

No no, he loses 1000 to the other shopkeeper, so ends up at -800 in cash, and also out the 200 for the bag, so a loss of 1000.

[@lankapatiravan89]

I supposed the answer to be 4...! Reason is if I overlap the first dice on second dice like a page of book the final image formed will be like the third dice.. similarly if overlap the 4th and 5th dice final image should be a 4 on dice...!

[@smfinch99]

I had the same thinking

[@satyamraj4378]

& I supposed it to be 6.. 3 dots(odd) , 3 dots(odd) , 5 dots (3+2)(odd) , then 4 dots (even) , 4 dots (even), 4+2= 6 dots (even)

[@IPkaar]

1200 would be the right answer... 200 goods loss. Plus need to give 1000 to next shopkeeper...that's it....if you think it by ignoring the next shopkeeper it will be more easier.

[@nambi9249]

Even i was thinking the same thing bro

[@kajolshah6982]

Loss of 2000 200 bag 800 given to lady 1000 to shopkeeper

[@viralvideos3764]

No the first thousand wasn't his money . Loss is 1000

[@dannyhendron2903]

kajol shah but of the thousand he gave to the shopkeeper, he'd already pocketed two hundred - so he lost eighteen hundred

[@PR-fk5yb]

The dice test is a lateral thinking test. As with all lateral thinking tests one can solve using other ways of thinking. I say "C" is also a correct answer. Sequence TTFFF... (three three five four four...) look on the QWERTY keyboard... TT is twice the fifth on 1st row F three times the fourth on second row... C the third on third row! ... sequence would need to be CCCC... lateral thinking needs imagination... in a way many possible answer... and yes the arithmetic answer 6 is also correct...

[@shumbathkumar]

Yes I also got the same answer

[@l.w.paradis2108]

Look at the last problem this way: forget the lady. You ask your friend to give you five $20 bills in exchange for a $100 bill. Your friend obliges, then finds out the $100 bill is counterfeit. You give him the five $20 bills back. Your loss is $100. You had what you thought was $100, and it turned out to be worthless. By the same logic: your loss is 1000 rupees, the friend's loss is zero, and the lady's gain is 1000 rupees in money and merchandise, assuming the bill originated with her. If not, then she presumably earned the money in some way, and her loss is zero as well. The counterfeiter gained 1000 rupees, whoever he may be.

[@jenarajalaxmi640]

800 of own and 200 on bag

[@arulanthony5040]

Bag money he received

[@naveencooray2733]

loss should be 1800. 1. bag costs 200 2. gives 800 to the lady. 3. has to pay extra 800 to the other shop. (because he keeps 200 from the 1000) total is 1800.

[@HS-yz7ui]

Why he has to pay 800 to the shop if it's 1000rs which is fake. He has to pay 1000back. His total lost is 2000rs.

[@its....atomizinganask7212]

Naveen Cooray not extra 800....extra 1000 all the 1000 rs of the shopkeeper is given to the other shop

[@akshayneotia782]

But in the riddle it is said that there was no profit for the bag

[@its....atomizinganask7212]

akshay neotia ya no profit..... so the 200 ra of the bag is loss.....total loss of shopkeeper is 2000

[@akshayneotia782]

@@its....atomizinganask7212 that is what I'm telling that total loss is 2000

[@ganesh55507]

Lady gain 1000 rs profit, indirectly shop keeper loss 1000 rs

[@maheshnaidulalam4703]

Short and simple answer bro

[@derGlasdrache]

Q1 has several solutions, for example, it can be 3, 3, 5, 4, 4, 6 (+0+2-1+0+2-1 a.s.o.). In Q2 you need at least 1 cut. You just put all end pieces of every chain into the one cut open and have a mini circle.

[@jaswanthreddy9440]

Exactly. Even I got different answer which is logically correct.

[@agytjax]

For Q4, we have the mathematical formula = (m n)*INTEGER[Distance/{(m n) - }] Here (m n) is the "m choose n" combination. In this example, we have 5 tires and we need to choose 4 at any given time, so (5 4) = 4. Substituting above we get = 5 * INTEGER[20000/ (5-1)] = 25000

[@ajaykumargavade5455]

My logic is like 2 times 3 dots nxt 5 dots(2+3) 2 times 4 dots nxt (2+4) must 6 dots...😜

[@Andrew-kh7rz]

Thought the same thing

[@Wall_of_gratitude]

Mine logic was same... We math people... 😁

[@billalhossain9832]

I have also thought like the way you did

[@harichandanabandi2256]

Answer is 1000/-.... shopkeeper bought the change for 1000/- and gave 800/- and took 200/-....all this is actual money not fake and he also received bag amount.....the loss is when he realised it is fake amount he gives money to next shop person that's the loss...So total loss is 1000/-

[@NotGemFN]

You are right..

[@karanbharadva9820]

Dude.! You have to count the prize of the bag as well. And the 200 is the money he received from the lady. You are massively wrong !

[@harichandanabandi2256]

@@karanbharadva9820 yeah..he received money from lady its actual money not fake so there is no loss in money related to bag

[@karanbharadva9820]

@@harichandanabandi2256 but the 200 + other 800 he had to give it to the boy. Means he's at the loss of -800 + 800 that he gave to the lady + the value of bag which is all equal to 1800. Correct answer is 1800.

[@HeroicJay]

@@karanbharadva9820 No, everything except the bill being fake is a distraction. If the bill was real, every exchange would have been even and no loss would have been incurred. Making a sale is not loss. Giving change is not loss. The loss is all related to the bill being fake, and therefore it is the value of the fake bill - 1000. As I said separately, how much did the woman gain? 200 for the bag and 800 in change. That's 1000. How much did the neighboring business give or lose? Nothing, they broke even. They exchanged 1000 for a fake 1000, and when they realized it was fake, they took the 1000 back. So if the woman gained 1000, and the neighboring shop broke even, and the shopkeeper lost more than 1000... where exactly did all the extra money go?

[@tharindus.wijesinghe2109]

If that 1000 rs is not a fake, nothing any losses, if it is fake that 1000 only loss

[@davidjames1684]

1st puzzle... 3,3,5 4,4,6 (wait for a pair, then next die is +2)

[@gblargg]

3:17 For Q.4, just imagine rotating the tires every km. Clearly they'll all fail at basically the same time. So 20,000*5 tires divided by the four driven on = 25,000.

[@Faizan-Shafaqat]

but that is impossible because if all tires fails at one times the cars can not move on a single tyre. we have to replace first tyre on by one to all tiers within 20,000 km.

[@SixEightLiftsWeight]

The thief stole 200 in goods and 800 in real money received in change. The loss of any party in this situation has to be equal to the theft. The answer is 1000.

[@DarekKoczwara]

How about the merchandise. It's gone, too.

[@uv_sensei]

But he gave shopkeeper 1000 soo it's 2000 total

[@SixEightLiftsWeight]

@@uv_sensei No it’s not. The thief stole 200 in merchandise and 800 of the real money received from the boy next door. The boy comes back and collects the 200 of the real dollars left over and the shopkeeper needs to give 800 of his own money to the boy. The shop keep at the end of the day is -200 for merchandise and -800 for the portion of his money that he had to give the next door shop.

[@b.hedrick8144]

Before counterfeit is discovered - lady is up 1000 (200 bag + 800 cash) - Shop is even (-200 bag cost + 200 cash) - neighbor is even After counterfeit discovered, shop repays 1000 to neighbor. Shop is now out 1000. That's it

[@noodle_fc]

How can he repay 1000 when he only has 200? Neighbor takes the 200 cash which our shop just exchanged for their 200 bag. Shop loses 200; neighbor loses 800 in unrecoverable cash.

[@SimplySellers202]

@@noodle_fc Unless he had another 1,000 note in his register.

[@Anonymous-un8nl]

It is very simple.{Ans: 1000} There are three people: shopkeeper 1(s1) shopkeeper 2(s2) and the woman. If we come to the later part then, first s1 takes 1000 from s2 for the fake note and makes a profit of 1000. After that s2 takes his money back . Therefore total profit/loss of s1 till this is 0. Now since only two people remains , therefore the profit of one will be the loss for another . As we know that s1 faces a loss, therefore his loss = woman's profit. WOMAN'S PROFIT=200(bag)+800(the money that s1 returned)=1000

[@enumulaganesh5972]

(1200) bcoz the lady took one bag the bag cost is 200. Shopkeeper take 1000rps change for another shop and returns that 1000rps coz of that is fake note.😊

[@caseiorcreations5211]

Forget all about.money transaction...... She came with no money.... Shopkeeper given 200 bag+800 ₹ for free

[@naveenkondeti5494]

1000 is the right answer. And I would recommend u to make the answer of the puzzle in the next video

[@aksharkumardabhi3366]

And :- 1800 option E 1000(Lady) note is fake But she took 800 is real Shopkeeper-1 is give real money to shopkeeper-2 at the end. So first 800 and second is 1000 total is 1800 loss , bcz 200 money bag gives real money to pay and it has a no profit .

[@amannsrivastava]

Wo lady ₹200 ka Bag bhi to li thi.. use bhi add karo

[@aksharkumardabhi3366]

Yes she bought a bag , but those money are real , shopkeer ne Jo money liye vo to real money me se liye the na

[@amannsrivastava]

200 ka bag bhi free me gya.. Shopkeeper to uska bhi to nuksan hua..!!

[@aksharkumardabhi3366]

Simple calculation bro , 1000 shopkeep-2 pass hai real money , 800 change the vo lady k pass hai , bche 200rs vo shopkeer k hi pass hai aur questions me bola hai ki bag ka koi profit or loss nhi hai

[@pandu2749]

Answer is 1000

[@abhidesai3599]

Well, I think the correct answer is he lost 1000. Explanation:- As mentioned in question, he gave the bags for zero profit. So he was even. 1000 fake note was given by the lady to him, he took the same note nd gave it to the another shopkeeper. Got the change he took his share( ₹200) nd returned the remaining ₹800 to the lady. At ths point he was at zero profit zero loss. Next day he said the other shopkeeper ₹1000. Now he gave that money from his own pocket. So the total lost he made was ₹1000.

[@mdraquib4081]

Right bro👌

[@EricSchwartz02]

yatish kumar That is incorrect. “At that point he is having an useless 1000 rupee note...” this is where most people get confused (I did as well until I tracked it on paper). At this point HE has a 200 rupee note (zero profit, zero loss). It is the OTHER shop keeper that has a useless 1000 rupee note (for a 1000 rupee loss). When the other shop keeper demands the money back he returned the 200 rupee he had plus an additional 800 rupee from his own pocket. This is a loss of 800 rupee in cash plus the 200 rupee of bags that he started with, for a total of 1000 rupee.

[@fmjubaier9585]

I consider that , fake note = 0, so total loss bag and change. my answer 200+800=1000

[@akshayneotia782]

2000

[@gramerjenna]

@@akshayneotia782 nope answer is 1000rs Because At the beginning Cashier=0rs Woman -> Cashier +1000rs (as a note) Cashier = 1000rs(as a note) Cashier -> next shop +1000rs(as a note) Next shop -> cashier +1000rs(as a cash) Cashier = 1000rs(as a cash) Cashier -> woman +800rs Cashier =1000-800=200rs Cashier -> woman (plastic bag worth of 200rs) Cashier = 200-200 = 0rs Next shop owner demands his money back for fake note Cashier -> next shop (1000rs) Cashier = 0 - 1000 = -1000rs

[@kavitasingh2312]

bhai 1000 rs ke sath shopkeeper ka 200rs ka bag bhi to gaya to loss=1000+200=1200

[@fmjubaier9585]

@@kavitasingh2312 yes bag value 200 + real note 800 = total 1000

[@kiranvootori8101]

Solution for 4th question is easier in another method. Each tyre can travel 20,000 km. 5 tyres can travel 1,00,000 km. But car runs on 4 tyres at any given time. So, the answer is 1,00,000/4 = 25,000 km

[@akshitchoudhary8089]

1000 is the correct answer. Loss to shopkeeper = profit to women

[@thirunavukarasusekar7593]

Its 1200 bcs he also buy ya bag thats worth rs 200

[@saurabhmiskin6254]

Total Loss=200(Bag Cost)+800(Return to lady)+1000(neighbor)=Rs.2000

[@johandaun874]

But he got 1000 from the boy before. Its a closed loop. The lady got 1000 (200 + 800) the boy didnt get anything (1000-1000) so the keeper lost 1000 ((200+800)+(1000-1000))

[@RDSingh-xc1ln]

Bag Value = 200 Given to lady = 800 Given to shopkeeper = 1000 Total loss = 2000

[@aakashvaidya1350]

2000 200 bag given to lady 800 change given to lady Kept 200 for him self And then te bot came Gave back the fake 1000 rs note Took 1000 back

[@ifthefooshitswearit.1802]

The 800 he gave to the lady wasnt his loss. Fake or note it was her change.

[@b-rod3333]

Run through the transactions one at a time and you get a 1000 loss. 1. Shop keep gains 1000 from the lady and gives her 200. Now he’s +800 2. Shop keeper gives 1000 to the other store and gets 1000 back so he is still +800 3. He gives 800 back to the lady putting back to 0. 4. Other shop keeper comes and takes the 1000 back making him -1000 What makes this tricky is more than one transaction is being done at once making it easy to double count money. Scammers actually use this principle to trick shop keepers into giving them more money for their change.

[@johnmcnair8854]

No he gives the lady 200 bag plus 800 = 1000 then he has to give next door back 1000 so in total it's 2000. I know it's tricky but that's why it's called a brain teaser

[@b-rod3333]

@@johnmcnair8854 but the other shop keep previously gave him $1000. You haven’t taken that into consideration. Read my comment again as I explain exactly what money moves when. Another way to look at it is considered the total money he receives and how much he gives always. Received: 1. $0 from the lady since the note was fake 2. $1000 from the other shop keeper Total: $1000 Gives away: 1. $200 bag to the lady 2. $800 change to the lady 3. $1000 to the other shop keeper. This includes the fake bill worth $0 and the real $1000 he has to pay back Total: $2000 Yes he gives away $2000 but the question asked for his total loss. That’s what he received minus what he gave away. $1000 - $2000 = -$1000 so his total loss is $1000.

[@voiceofraisin241]

The dice answer can also be four. Rotate one of the three dot dice and superimpose it on the next three dot dice which makes it a five dot. Now rotate a four dot dice and superimpose it on the second four dot dice , which gives you a four dot dice.

[@anenome]

that was my deduction as well

[@vianneydubois2927]

Total loss = 1000: Transactions are: -200 Cost of buying the bag +0 (effectively what the lady gave him) -0 (effectively what he gave the other shopkeeper) +1000 (what the other shopkeeper gave him) -800 (what he gave the lady) -1000 (what he gave the other shopkeeper back) Total = -1000

[@harshitrochiramani8085]

After a long time ammar thankyou for such videos 😀

[@LOGICALLYYOURS]

Thanks Harshit... more puzzles on the way : )

[@NextStepEdification]

20000/4 × 5 for the tyre

[@dianegrainger3905]

I thought about it like this: when trading the fake bill to the other shop, the shopkeeper got 1000 real Rs which they had to pay back. The first shopkeeper got the fake 1000 Rs bill in exchange for the loss of the 200 Rs bag and the 800 Rs cash to the person that gave them the fake bill - Total = 1000 Rs.

[@saisushma3199]

Option c. 1000 is the right answer Cuz she gave him 1000 rupees note for the product worth 200 rupees and he returns 800 rupees to her ,so the product amount and the amount which he returned is 200+800=1000...

[@TheXzasxz]

What the shop keeper gave to the neigbor, he's got it back and opposite, so the balanse is 0. What he got for the lady was false 1000 Rs. He gave a bag and 800 Rs in return, so balanse is -1000Rs. So the balanse of all the operations is -1000 Rs - this is his loss.

[@jaygreen7494]

For those saying 2000 or 1800. If your solution is correct, you are saying he would have lost money even if the note was real. Does this make sense?

[@kalindamandade1234]

Answer is F. 2000 Explaination:- 1. Bag worth 200 rupees 2. 1000 back to the boy 3. Gave 800 to lady = 200 + 1000 + 800 = 2000

[@kuls43]

Hahaha, great IQ level. Transaction would have been fair only unfair was the 1000 rupee note. And shopkeeper had to keep that note in the end. Therefore total loss of shop keeper will be 1000.

[@kalindamandade1234]

@@kuls43 yes but he gave 800 to the lady as a change but if the note is fake so this was loss of 800 as well as the loss of bag which is the loss of 200 and giving the 1000 rupee note back so the total loss will be 800 + 200 + 1000 = 2000

[@kalindamandade1234]

@@kuls43 so it's better to check your IQ level first

[@kanishkmakkar6746]

He exchanged 1000 rs from shopkeeper so at that time there was no loss no gain after that he returned 800 back to women not from his pocket and got 200 After that he returned 1000 rs shopkeeper by adding 800 and at that time he lost 800 rs but the lady also purchased the purse so 800+200 =1000

[@kalindamandade1234]

@@kanishkmakkar6746 when the shopkeeper gave the change to the man, he returned 800rs back to the lady and kept 200 with him after that they got to know that the note is fake Now the 800 he gave is a loss and the 200 which he kept with him were of the bag she purchased and now he has to give 1000rs to another shopkeeper which is a loss of 1000rs (1000rs include the 200rs as it was not his ) and he lost a 200 rs bag. So, at last his loss was of 2000 rupees

[@denvercheddie]

You could trace the assets or you could just use a conservation approach. The lady gave away a fake note (zero value) and got 800 + a bag (value 200). She gained 1000. The other shop gave away 1000 and got back 1000. Zero net. Therefore somebody lost 1000 and it has to be the first shop.

[@noodle_fc]

You assume the first shop owes a debt, but the riddle doesn't say that. Next door shop comes back for 1000 but first shop only has 200. Our guy loses 200 (the value of the bag) and next door loses 800 (value of the bank notes they gave, minus the value of bank notes they reclaimed).

[@denvercheddie]

@@noodle_fc @4:58 Point #4 says "The boy from the shop next door comes with the 1000 rupee note saying it's a fake, and he takes his money back." That is as clear as day. Initially shop 1 gave shop 2 the 1000 note and received 1000 in smaller change. The next day, shop 2 brought back the 1000 note, and "takes back his money." Since he gave him 1000 on the first day, naturally he would have taken 1000 back. Your scenario would only be true if shop 1 had zero money in his cash register when the lady purchased the bag, and shop 2 came back immediately with the 1000 note. Then all shop 1 would have is 200 rupees. But shop 2 actually returned the next day. It is natural to assume that shop 1 collected more cash during the day. You are one assuming that he didn't.

[@noodle_fc]

​@@denvercheddie The solution to literally thousands of riddles depends on resisting a "natural" assumption and taking the situation exactly as stated. What's clear as day, _according to what is literally stated in the riddle,_ is that the shopkeeper has 200 rupees of the neighbor's money and the customer has the other 800. We all agree about that. But then write "takes his money back" and suddenly the location of 800 rupees of that money doesn't matter? Okay.

[@mikefochtman7164]

Well.... I looked at is as, the first shopkeeper may have many Rs 1000 notes in his till, but nothing smaller. So he went next door to get change for the lady's note. When the second shopkeeper discovered the fake, he came over and 'took his money back' by simply taking one of the first shopkeeper's Rs 1000 notes. Assuming this is the way it happened, then the first shopkeeper lost Rs 1000 total, in the form of a bag (Rs 200) and Rs 800 in smaller notes. He has one fewer Rs 1000 notes in his till, but now also has Rs 200 smaller notes. But doesn't have the bag anymore. He's lost Rs 1000 in value, the Rs 1000 note he let the neighbor have to replace the fake note.

[@denvercheddie]

@@mikefochtman7164 Thank you for that clear explanation. I really don't think it can be explained any more clearly than you did. And if people still can't get it from that, then they can't get it.

[@chethann5470]

ANSWER is 1000 how means let us consider Women stole 1000 from shopkeeper(800 +200 bag) Shopkeeper left with -1000 Again shopkeeper borrowed 1000 from neighbour and returned it . So he is still left with that same -1000 only so answer is 1000.

[@WOIBONGRONRANG]

It will be 2000 since shopkeeper gave the bag worth of rs 200 and then he returned 800 after that again he gave 1000 to another shopkeeper.. So in total he loses 2000

[@vinspad3]

200. That's it. The bag was 200 Lady pays 1000 Shopkeeper keeps 200. Lady gets 800. Next door asks for money back, but the shopkeeper only has 200 to give. The shopkeeper OWES 1000, but only has 200 to give.

[@hadihasanmerchant1314]

And the inventory loss of 200. He'll lose the bag worth 200 for which he has paid before.

[@shahjamilohi8059]

He lost 1800 As the note was fake he gave the lady extra 800 from his pocket Again the other shopkeeper took 1000 from him The only thing he got was that 200 which is actually the price of the bag so this is not any of his profit or loss Therefore ultimately he lost 1800

[@hemant__lifts]

Ans is 2000, he also gave the bag worth rs 200 to the lady, that is also his loss..

[@johnmcnair8854]

@@hemant__liftsyou're dead right. there's a lot of really bad shopkeepers commenting on here. I wouldnt want to be their bank manager

[@KemosabeTBC]

@@johnmcnair8854 Yes, there are a lot of bad shopkeepers commenting that the answer is anywhere between 1200-2000. The answer is 1000

[@bapujamesgaming9825]

E 2000 Rs Because the bag 200Rs + the amount he returns to the lady 800Rs + he have to return the other shopkeeper 1000Rs So 200+800+1000= 2000👍

[@Araqius]

Wrong. The correct answer is 1000.

[@Araqius]

The lady get 1000. The next shop gain/lose nothing. He can only lose 1000.

[@bapujamesgaming9825]

@@Araqius 👍Yes you are correct

[@marjensendk]

It doesn’t matter what happend with the bag or the lady before the last transaction. If he gives the 1.000 to the other shop, while receiving nothing in return, then the loss must be the 1.000

[@Whatsluck1]

And he also lost the bag, which is worth 200. So he lost 1200 in total.

[@Araqius]

@@Whatsluck1 He has 200 at the end. imgur.com/a/gvLqnUx At the start, the shopkeeper has a bag worth 200. At the end, he has 200 and a debt of 1000.

[@marjensendk]

@@Whatsluck1 he was paid with real money for the bag, so he didn't lose anything in that transaction.