They were just another way of doing the same thing. I rounded it to two
decimal places, John multiplied it by 100 and made that into an integer then
divided by 100. Same result, mines is just less convoluted, and thus more
efficient <bg. But John did answer the requirement more accurately in
providing a solution between 10 and 100, whereas mine gave 0 -1 100.

In summary, the best answer IMO is John's last reply which combined my
approach with his accurate reading,

=ROUND((RAND()*90+10),2)

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(replace somewhere in email address with gmail if mailing direct)

"Dermot" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the reply Bob,

I understand your formula thanks for this, just whatt I was looking for.
Can you explain a little further please...
Is the inital formula that Toppers suggested ...........
1. Incorrect?
2. Another way of doing the same thing?
3. Advantages / Disadvantages of using your formulae......if it is a
correct
method?

Thanks again
Dermot

"Bob Phillips" wrote:

Good spot, I missed the 10 min.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(replace somewhere in email address with gmail if mailing direct)

"Toppers" wrote in message
...
...... as Bob's reply ..

=ROUND((RAND()*90+10),2)

"Dermot" wrote:

Is there a way to add any randomly generated number between 10 and
100
(to
two decimal places) to a Varying figure in a cell.........

For Example.....
2800 + 89.21 = 2889.21

Another Example...
3000 + 21.67 = 3021.67