Author Topic: Any native english speakers? (Read 19299 times)

kalos · « **Reply #25 on:** December 25, 2017, 02:37 AM »

Yo no comprendo.
STEP 1 (calculate)
STEP 2 (proof)

...That's it.
It would seem to be an elementary accounting question.
-IainB (December 24, 2017, 08:23 PM)

Yeah, I know, but how much you calculated it to be? Because I find 3.1

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #26 on:** December 25, 2017, 09:50 AM »

...
Generally speaking one will not necessarily be able to establish a significant statistical trend from just 2 (or 3) successive annual data-points. A significant trend usually only emerges over longer time-series data. Thus, to be correct, there are no "trends" in the data given in the example.
...
-IainB (December 23, 2017, 10:16 PM)

In some of the business reading that's crossed my eyes in the midst of a wide project, I am confused here.
I "almost" agree that no *two* points make a "trend", but doesn't *three*!?

Linguistically, to me, it becomes questions like "sustainable trend vs short lived trend", because businesses "do business" in Year 1, click along, close the books. In Year 2, they "do more business", close the books, and someone does the subtraction and goes "uhh... Boss? What happened here?"

It's at least fundamental to American Accounting, that assuming no foul play, Management Reports "what happened" and it could be "anything".

But the *third year* comes along and when the books close, Management has to decide (and here's a cool linguistic trick):
Level 1. "Okay, what's going on."
Level 2 "Wait, what IS going on!?"
Level 3 "What is going ON?!!"

And it's legendary in business theory they either perform *briliantly* in year 4-5 (sometimes it takes a year of just ops to come in), or they MISSED a fundamental and can *crash*. (With varying years of market inertia etc. Sorta like the iPhone 3GS showed up, and I did that one right, it was EXACTLY the model to avoid early phaseout, but had *just* enough firepower to be a "supported model" and mine lasted me about *six* years!"

So then it takes a while for the Blackberry to grind out its endgame, but there it went.

So not counting a "tread-water" year in year 4, a business had really better have a GRAND "Stage 3GS" plan or they croak.

IainB · « **Reply #27 on:** December 26, 2017, 07:56 AM »

@TaoPhoenix: My apologies for not explaining better!
I was not using the word "trend" in a context where one might intuitively or"linguistically" expect it to be used, but in the context of it being used as a valid statistical tool for assessing past annual financial performance. Trends are statistical tools really only relevant over longer term datasets, and they are of little use/applicability in assessing past corporate annual financial performance over the short or longer term.

With the heading Any native english speakers? (sic), the OP illustrates a question regarding (I had thought) the use of Engrish in a hypothetical/artificial case - a set of annual expenses and income data for a company over a 2-year period - where the student is asked to project what the tax would be at the end of year 3 at 35% tax rate on an income projected on the same rate of growth/change as occurred between the 1st and 2nd years.

What does "trend" mean?

trend
· n.
1 a general direction in which something is developing or changing.
2 a fashion.
· v. (especially of a geographical feature) bend or turn away in a specified direction. Ø chiefly N. Amer. change or develop in a general direction.
– ORIGIN OE trendan ‘revolve, rotate’, of Gmc origin; cf. trundle.
Concise Oxford Dictionary (10th Ed.)

Clearly (I hope), I have been using the word in the 1st sense: "a general direction in which something is developing or changing".

However, this may be largely irrelevant as, from @kalos' last comment, it now seems as though I was wrong and the OP was actually seeking the answer to the question (what is the tax value in year 3?).

IainB · « **Reply #28 on:** December 26, 2017, 09:26 AM »

mouser · « **Reply #29 on:** December 26, 2017, 06:19 PM »

Hate to stick my head in here for risk of making a fool out of myself. You seem to have found the answer, but I am embarrassed to say that what should be a simple math problem confused me. Somehow intuitively I assumed that if the component trends stay the same, the total trend change would stay the same percent, and so that all we should have to look at is the trend in income before taxes, and that therefore the before-taxes income percentage change would stay the same year after year..

I guess if you think about it, it makes sense why you can't just look at the overall before-taxes income trend.. If your costs are growing at a very small rate and your sources of other income are growing at a higher rate, then your overall trend in net income will be increasing at an increasing rate.

IainB · « **Reply #30 on:** December 27, 2017, 10:55 AM »

@mouser:
Yes, STEP 1 was the rule-of-thumb that one might well intuitively apply - and it would be wrong.
Sure, it might be OK as an approximation, but this is a compound calculation and the clue was that they wanted a precise answer - i.e., only one out of the 5 multiple-choice figures was correct.
This is an accounting problem, so the buggers are bound to make the student work for the correct answer!

That necessitated STEP 2 - providing a proof of the answer.

kalos · « **Reply #31 on:** April 01, 2018, 08:33 PM »

Any idea for the below???

Any native english speakers?

wraith808 · « **Reply #32 on:** April 01, 2018, 09:07 PM »

Is that second one 35=3 * 81? If I'm reading correctly (hard to see because of the size of the image), none of them are true.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #33 on:** April 01, 2018, 09:38 PM »

Why are we doing somebodies homework?

4wd · « **Reply #34 on:** April 01, 2018, 10:37 PM »

Is that second one 35=3 * 81? If I'm reading correctly (hard to see because of the size of the image), none of them are true.
-wraith808 (April 01, 2018, 09:07 PM)

Pretty sure it's: 35 = 3.81

... not that it would make a difference ...

Logically that would make the first two choices false which leaves only interpretation of the third choice:

√6 x 3 = ⁶√6
√6 x 3 = 6 x √6
(√6)³ = ⁶√6
(√6)³ = 6 x √6

Pick one.

To extend logic a little further in the case of the third choice, you have the following possible outcomes given the four interpretations above:

One (or more) is true
None are true

While there are answers that permit for the third choice to be either true or false, given that the first two choices are false there are no answers that provide for:

Only the third choice to be true
All the choices to be false

My analysis is based upon a fully caffeinated brain cell.

Why are we doing somebodies homework?
-Stephen66515 (April 01, 2018, 09:38 PM)

Because we're bored.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #35 on:** April 01, 2018, 10:42 PM »

Is that second one 35=3 * 81? If I'm reading correctly (hard to see because of the size of the image), none of them are true.
-wraith808 (April 01, 2018, 09:07 PM)

Pretty sure it's: 35 = 3.81

... not that it would make a difference ...

Why are we doing somebodies homework?
-Stephen66515 (April 01, 2018, 09:38 PM)

Because we're bored.
-4wd (April 01, 2018, 10:37 PM)

Fair enough.

wraith808 · « **Reply #36 on:** April 01, 2018, 11:01 PM »

Because we're bored.
-4wd (April 01, 2018, 10:37 PM)

Exactly.

4wd · « **Reply #37 on:** April 01, 2018, 11:11 PM »

Actually, given the shitty font/typesetting, choice #1 could be correct if interpreted as:

2⁹ = 8³

Both are 512.

As written/typeset, however, it is incorrect ... if it was me I would be stating:

I only - Is the correct answer provided that there has been an error in the selection of font or typesetting.

Otherwise, as wraith said, all the given answers are false.

ADDENDUM: Guess what, if the second statement is indeed a * rather than a .

3⁵ = 3 x 81

My considered opinion is to return the question to whoever wrote it and ask that they reformat the question in English as there's no correct answer given the poor formatting of the question.

cranioscopical · « **Reply #38 on:** April 02, 2018, 09:02 AM »

You guys have read too little science fiction!

Spoiler

"The intelligent man is never bored"
Isaac Asimov

wraith808 · « **Reply #39 on:** April 02, 2018, 09:18 AM »

You guys have read too little science fiction!

Spoiler
"The intelligent man is never bored"
Isaac Asimov

-cranioscopical (April 02, 2018, 09:02 AM)

Because it was intriguing? >.>

4wd · « **Reply #40 on:** April 02, 2018, 09:44 AM »

You guys have read too little science fiction!

Spoiler
"The intelligent man is never bored"
Isaac Asimov

-cranioscopical (April 02, 2018, 09:02 AM)

Because it was intriguing? >.>
-wraith808 (April 02, 2018, 09:18 AM)

Nope, I was bored.

kalos · « **Reply #41 on:** April 02, 2018, 03:05 PM »

FYI, my choice was '1 only'.

That's because 2+9=8+3.

This question was part of the prestigious GMAT that world's leaders need to take in order to be admitted for their MBA.

tomos · « **Reply #42 on:** April 02, 2018, 03:39 PM »

2+9=8+3.

This question was part of the prestigious GMAT that world's leaders need to take in order to be admitted for their MBA.
-kalos (April 02, 2018, 03:05 PM)

So, 29 is now equal to 83. So that's what's wrong with the world's leaders

wraith808 · « **Reply #43 on:** April 02, 2018, 05:28 PM »

It's a lack of reasoning game, based on interpreting the questions in the best way for you!

(or is that just Kalos for posting an image and not checking it for accuracy?)

4wd · « **Reply #44 on:** April 02, 2018, 05:40 PM »

It's a lack of reasoning game, based on interpreting the questions in the best way for you!
-wraith808 (April 02, 2018, 05:28 PM)

Then "I and II only" is also correct, (dependant on a better image).

I could probably come up with some esoteric branch of mathematics that also proved that III was correct.

kalos · « **Reply #45 on:** May 05, 2018, 02:53 PM »

It's a lack of reasoning game, based on interpreting the questions in the best way for you!
-wraith808 (April 02, 2018, 05:28 PM)

Then "I and II only" is also correct, (dependant on a better image).

I could probably come up with some esoteric branch of mathematics that also proved that III was correct.
-4wd (April 02, 2018, 05:40 PM)

Eventually, I think all three are correct.
The III is correct becase square root of 6 raised to the power of 3 makes six times square root of six