Yo man, That’s the same as his PEMDAS. You needed to lay off the math and put in some more English. 
My guess is that the law in some jurisdictions where Subway operates makes games of chance illegal. By introducing a skill component they avoid charges of running an illegal lottery. It may not be their fault.
If that is the case, the skill question should be 1 + 1 = ?
That’s the sort of thing that usually satisfies the skill requirements.
That’s how some bowling leagues got away with their 50/50 raffles every week. You had to roll the ball down the lane. You didn’t have to make a strike or even knock over any pins, you just had to have the skill to roll the ball down the lane. (Some leagues required a strike or gave away a dollar per pin for anything short of a strike which made for higher pots in the following weeks, but that doesn’t apply here.)
Why don’t you just call Subway corporate? Or email the president of Subway? The rant was borderline over-the-top for such small stakes, but you’re rapidly crossing the line to full-on overreaction.
Plus you failed at basic math, so there’s that.
Just sayin’.
It’s the Pit - he didn’t overreact enough. Where’s the threat to skullfuck Jared, already?
Pffft… quitter.
Ah ha! I see the problem. You are playing Subway’s game in Canada, where certain types of games of pure chance are illegal. Mixed games of chance and skill are legal. From here:
“By adding an element of skill to a game, a contest will be protected from scrutiny under these provisions.[4] Therefore, games that would otherwise constitute games of pure chance are usually transformed into games of mixed skill and chance by requiring winners to answer a “skill-testing question” before claiming prizes.”
Vlad/Igor
That does not appear to apply here:
True, but I’m not the lawyer telling the Canadian Subway how to run its game, either. It is, after all, just one of several available restaurants, unless the OP is living in Labrador.
No doubt. Really, though, my money is on the skill test serving to reduce the number of eligible payoffs, not for legal reasons. Bit underhanded, I agree, but hardly worth getting your undies in a wad over.
That’s so odd. I learned it as BOMDAS when I was in secondary school, (high school for Americans I think?).
Which is strange for two reasons - first, we had of instead of exponent, and second, we have multiplication before division.
Was I always taught wrong?? Or does Europe just have different rules even for maths.
(I’m from Ireland b.t.w.)
His skull is now too narrow for the OP’s cock to fit, due to eating healthy Subway sandwiches.
As far as I can recall it won’t make any difference if you do multiplication before or after division because you’re using the same factors either way.
Eg., 4 * 12 / 6 = 48 / 6 = 8… or 4 * 12 / 6 = 4 * 2 = 8.
No, the reason for the skill element in Canadian contests, such as the OP is complaining about, is for legal reasons. From the Criminal Code of Canada:
Emphasis mine, and it’s pretty clear that a contest involving pure chance is illegal.* However, a game of mixed chance and skill is perfectly fine. This would include situations like the OP’s where the buyer of a sandwich is offered a random prize ticket (chance) that, if a winner, could only be redeemed if the person passed a test of skill, such as a math question.
- There are, as might be expected, exceptions to the “pure chance” provisions of s. 206 for such things as provincial lotteries, legal casinos, horse racing, and games of chance benefiting a charity, but a commercial venture’s contests (such as Subway Scrabble, McDonald’s Monopoly, and the like) wouldn’t fall under them.
I see why you’re upset, but not how you can claim to be “ripped off”. Did your game pieces that you paid for not come with, you know, a sandwich? Which you presumably ate instead of throwing it away and keeping the game piece?
Well, presumably the game will draw in customers who see value added to their experience above and beyond the normally delicious subway experience. Otherwise, why run the promotion?
So these people believe there is value added. There is not. Therefore these people are being ripped off.
Your OP made me chuckle but this has me in hysterics. Allusions to a deep conspiracy in the Subway prize racket? Damn, why don’t you just admit that you fucked up the basic math question and get on with your life? You think you deserve a gift certificate. They tested your skill; they disagree. 
Wha…? I oughta…Shakes fist
Incorrect. What is being offered is a chance to win prizes. They have that. Unless you can demonstrate that Subway is acting in some manner to make winning impossible, nobody is being ripped off.
Yeah, but
12 / 6 * 4 = 2 * 4 = 8
12 / 6 * 4 = 12 / 24 = 0.5
We’re not in a court where what is contained deep within the fine print matters (and even then sometimes it doesn’t.) Until now I’ve never heard of a contest that requires you to answer unrelated trivia or math questions in order to claim a prize they promote as instantly winning. A reasonable person should not conclude that that could possibly even be part of the requirement to win a prize, unless it’s promoted as such.
In fact, were I to “win” a prize like this only to be met with a semi-simple question in order to really win, the first thing I’d think of is “when did Subway get bought out by Internet come-on advertisements”? There’s no reason to believe you’ll win something if you click on them, so why should I believe the answer to a totally unrelated question should even matter to whether Subway will honor its instant giveaway contest?