To: MtnClimber
Ok help me out. 200 US tons = 400,000 lbs = 6,400,000 oz. x $1,230/oz for gold = $7,872,000,000.00.
7.8B is a helluva long way from $133B.
Is my maths wrong?
14 posted on
07/20/2018 9:58:05 AM PDT by
DCBryan1
(Quit calling them liberals, progs, socialists, or democrats. Call them what they are: COMMUNISTS!!!!)
To: DCBryan1
I bet it has gold but not as much as they say—maybe only 24% of the estimated amount.
To: DCBryan1
You are correct. The author is math challenged.
21 posted on
07/20/2018 10:30:34 AM PDT by
TruthFactor
(Hang em', Hang em' High.)
To: DCBryan1
Is my maths wrong? Yes, a little bit. Gold is measured in Troy ounces which are 12 to a pound, not 16.
34 posted on
07/20/2018 11:34:34 AM PDT by
PUGACHEV
To: DCBryan1
Your math is wrong. Gold is measured in Troy ounces. There are about 14.58 Troy ounces per pound. You’re about 10% high on your calculation.
39 posted on
07/20/2018 1:40:39 PM PDT by
Go_Raiders
(The fact is, we really don't know anything. It's all guesswork and rationalization.)
To: DCBryan1
Yes, you're wrong! Let us send you our brouchure, "Gold Math for Dummies"!
To: DCBryan1
Your math is correct.
Alternatively, $39,350.91/kg * 200 * 1000 kg/metric ton = $7.87 bn.
A lot of problematic calculations in the article, including the claim there might not have been room for the gold in the hold. The 1600 tons of coal alone occupy a space at least 120 times larger (that's if it was solid anthracite, and more likely the space required would be 150 times larger in reality.)
44 posted on
07/21/2018 12:14:50 AM PDT by
FredZarguna
(And what Rough Beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward 5th Avenue to be born?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson