I am doing an analysis of old prices vs. new. If an old price is $1.36 and the new price is $1.97, then there’s an increase of 44.85%, right?
The factory said it’s not 44.85%, but 20%. Perhaps they have a different original price than I do or I’m going crazy.
So, am I going crazy?
No, you’re right.
% increase = (change/original price) x 100
So the increase is 61c, and the percentage increase is 61/136 x 100 = 44.85%, as you said.
I have no idea where the factory is coming from - even if they did the calcualtion wrong and divided by the new price, it would still only be 30.96% (i.e., The old price is 30.96% lower than the new price).
100 plus 10% is 110, however, 110 less 10% is 99 - I suspect it’s something to do with this.
It doesn’t seem to be - as I said, even using the calculation for a reduction you still come out with over 30%.
Is it possible that one of you transposed digits on the original price? If the original was $1.63, then the increase is 24 cents, or 20.8% of the original price.
Or else whoever you’re talking to at the factory is an idiot. Either way.
This is a pet peeve of mine. Nobody seems to get percentages right. The problem is so pervasive that I never trust %age figures until I do the calculation myself.
Anyhow, I have no idea whence the 20% figure came. They must be using some really new math to come up with that one.
At least the company appears to accept the word “increase”.
My cable company has not had an “increase” in twenty years. But they have had many, many price “adjustments” – all upward by the way.
Whew. I just checked and there’s no transposition of the numbers, according to the spreadsheet they sent me. You had me scared for a minute there.
So I guess that it’s Kathy at the factory who’s the idiot. Thank Jebus!
Thanks everyone.