3 people go to a shop to buy a watch which is £30.

They each contribute £10 each to buy the watch.

They buy for the watch for £30, each person paying £10 each.

The shop owner later realises that the watch was not £30, but it was £25.

So he decides to contact the buyers and return the £5.

But he thinks how can he split the £5 between the 3 buyers.

So he decides he will take £2 and return £3 to the buyers, giving them £1 each.

So now with each of the 3 getting £1 back, it works out that each person paid £9 each for the watch.

So 3 people paid £9 each for the watch, so it total they paid £27 in total.

And the shop owner kept £2 for himself, which makes a total of £29. ( 9 X 3 = 27)


So where is the missing £1 ???????????????

25 + 5 -2 isn't good enough


Good luck

They paid 25 plus 2 he did not return is 27
27 divided by 3 is 9 per person

Debits and credits have been added and subtracted from each other. That is a no no unless you work for enron or the gubmint.

Ok. It seems there is a bug in maths which I am unable to work out. If there is a bug then someone must benefit. I am sure someone must have the answers since it’s not a trick question.

30-2 = 28. Also we know the final price was 3x9 = 27. Someone must have the extra Butt wipes in the paper transaction.

Come on u guys you can do lot better then that.

It is 30 minus 3 he returned is 27
Or 25 plus 2 he retained is 27
Otherwise you are cloning debit and credit which only genetically
modified organism manipulators approved by the FDA are allowed to do
I used to work for one

If shopowner is honest (for tax purposes), I assume he put the 2 bucks back in shop's cash making selling price of the watch 27 bucks.

If shopowner wants to show that watch was sold for 25 bucks only then he makes 2 bucks of nontaxable profit (still making selling price of the watch 27 bucks)

3 bucks were refunded to buyers.

That accounts for all 30.

Sure u guys can do better then that.



30 – 2 in pocket make £28 but we know final cost was £9 each unless 9 X 3 = 28 then someone must have the extra money or my maths is not up to scratch.

the question was asked in a confusing way.
and you keep on getting confused.
as it was written above.
they paid $30 and got returned $3 = which makes it 27 - that's how much they paid.
if you look at it that way everything makes sense and everything is rigght. if you look at it the way the puzzle wants you to, you wonder where is a missing 1 pound

Ok- The Vanishing Leprechaun has got the extra pound.

Prancing cow is the welcome new Winner guy! The problem is all in the question and what it gives you, then makes you explain..

Let's rejoin our friend the shopkeeper, remorseful holder of $30, $5 of which he is willing to refund..



The larceny begins here. Our shopkeeper already has the $30, yes he may give some back, but he also decides to receive two bucks he already had.... A cash flow mirage ... it did work for Enron for a while however.

But where were we...



This much is true!



This is true as well!



pretty much true as well, but then he went and counted it.... For the second time.... not a proper GAAP approach....



The bogus addition is hidden behind the 'which makes $29' part. Garbage accounting, garbage question, garbage posibilities for the answer....



You'll need it in court....

25+2=27............30-3=27. There is no missing money.

Most of you have it right there is no missing money. Its not 27 + 2 it meant to be 27 – 2 because shop keeper has £25 then you add £2 which makes £27

By adding £2 one can cook the books like Enron, FNM or any other outfit which wants to show extra profit at the same time confuse the Auditor.

Does anyone want to work in book cooking operations??

Many thanks

FeedFool : What kind of watch was it ?