Hypothetical preservation economic questions and other really ridiculous stuff

I am knee-deep in my end of the winter quarter Preservation Economics and Development class project.  As in, it’s due at midnight tonight.  I’m just having big issues with the whole “hypothetical” part.  I had to pick a building in my area that fit a very long list of criteria.  Then, I had to “hypothetically” rehabilitate the building into an income producing property.  But with this, you had to use all the real life zoning laws and other regulations.  Now, I need to configure the “hypothetical” costs.  Loan amounts.  Rehab cost. Soft costs. Etc…  Really?  I know that there is base line to go by, but come on.  How much financial guessing can I really do?  It reminds of when I was cramming for the GRE.  I was exhausted and my friend Ashley was over helping me.  At this point, I felt that I couldn’t see straight, let alone solve anymore math problems.  Then we came across this crazy problem.  At the time, it seemed like such an insane math question.  We were both like WTF???

So, this morning I decided to google that math problem.  Maybe to make me smile.  Maybe to remind myself that it too can be solved.  Just like this project will be finished.

Here it is! (now remember, we had been solving math problem for hours and then we get this one.)

5. A ranch has horses and ponies. Five-sixths of the ponies have horseshoes. Half of the ponies with horseshoes are Icelandic. If there are three more horses than ponies, what is the minimum number of horses and ponies on the ranch?
A. 12
B. 15
C. 27
D. 48
E. 54

thank you miss ashley malone for helping me actually solve those GRE math problems.  Too bad you and your business degree are all the way in denver right now.

0 comments

  1. Amy says:

    Oh. My. God. WTF really seems like the only possible response to that math problem. Sure, it’s probably a solvable math problem, bu the *correct response* is most assuredly WTF. Hope the paper released you at some point! 😉 (Amy from YAYOM)

Leave a Reply