#19 - Global, List

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[hope]

I wasn't able to answer this question correctly. I'm assuming that I don't quite understand the rules.

Given that C is the correct answer, how is it that:

RealProp: The Garza bldg which is class 1 correctly trades with the Lynch bldg which is class 2? Doesn't this violate Rule 1 which says the trading of one building must match the same class? Moreover, doesn't it also violate Rule 2 that requires a Class 1 bldg be traded for Two Class 2 bldgs.

I realize that adding the two buildings together comes out to be $1.50, but is that the only thing we are supposed to be accomplishing when the rules seem to be violated?

Trustcorp: How can there be a trade here? Trustcorp already owns the King, Ortiz and Zimmer bldgs. Where is the trade? There doesn't seem to be the ONE trade as suggested by the scenario.

What am I not understanding? Appreciate it. But just trying to dig in like Jon Denning always encourages us to do.
hope

[Adam Tyson]

These answers aren't describing the trade being made, hope, but are giving you the results AFTER one trade has been made. So for R to end up with G and L, that would mean they traded away Y and Z (the two Class 3 buildings they started with) to S for L (a Class 2 building). So here's what happened:

RealProp to Soutchco: "Hey Southco, I like that Lynch building. Can I have it?"

Southco to RealProp: "Sure, let's make a deal. How about you give me those two houses of yours, Yates and Zimmer?"

RealProp: "Deal!"

(trade is made)

Resulting ownership of the buildings after that one trade:

R: GL (they kept the G that they had at the beginning and traded Y and Z together for L)
S: FYZ (they kept the F that they had before and swapped the L away to get Y and Z)
T: KMO (they didn't trade anything - only one trade was made, the one between R and S))

Answer C is describing these results.

[hope]

I was blind but now I see. First, I interpreted the scenario to require that all three buildings had to make one trade. But according to what you've shown me Adam is T did not have to make a trade which is the true meaning of the scenario's statement of: after one trade. I thought all companies had to make the one trade.

And as for the rest of my confusion -- which you cleared up -- I don't even know where my head was at. But now I get it. Thanks Adam.
hope