Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to
solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved. I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit. Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to 7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum amount? A B C D E Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33 c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00 e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67 f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00 20 1000 3 1000 (I hope this is legible after I post it) The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot. The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4) This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130 allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of the pot based on the remaining participants shares. =IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4) Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150 has now slipped below the minimum to $122. I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly. I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a solution to this puzzle? |
#2
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
POT: 1000 Remainder: 220 Revised
Original 1st Cut Scores Above Spread Remainder a 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0 b 5 250 130 5 73.3 203.3 c 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0 d 1 50 130 0 0.0 130.0 e 7 350 130 7 102.7 232.7 f 3 150 130 3 44.0 174.0 Tot 20 1000 780 15 220.0 1000.0 give everyone 130 and then divvy the remainder proportionally from the subset of people who are above the minimum. -- Regards, Tom Ogilvy "davegb" wrote: I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved. I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit. Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to 7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum amount? A B C D E Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33 c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00 e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67 f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00 20 1000 3 1000 (I hope this is legible after I post it) The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot. The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4) This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130 allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of the pot based on the remaining participants shares. =IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4) Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150 has now slipped below the minimum to $122. I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly. I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a solution to this puzzle? |
#3
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Tom Ogilvy wrote: POT: 1000 Remainder: 220 Revised Original 1st Cut Scores Above Spread Remainder a 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0 b 5 250 130 5 73.3 203.3 c 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0 d 1 50 130 0 0.0 130.0 e 7 350 130 7 102.7 232.7 f 3 150 130 3 44.0 174.0 Tot 20 1000 780 15 220.0 1000.0 give everyone 130 and then divvy the remainder proportionally from the subset of people who are above the minimum. -- Regards, Tom Ogilvy Doh! Thanks Tom! "davegb" wrote: I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved. I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit. Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to 7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum amount? A B C D E Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33 c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00 d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00 e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67 f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00 20 1000 3 1000 (I hope this is legible after I post it) The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot. The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4) This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130 allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of the pot based on the remaining participants shares. =IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4) Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150 has now slipped below the minimum to $122. I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly. I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a solution to this puzzle? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Recursive Functions...maybe | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
Recursive Code | Excel Programming | |||
Help with Recursive Call? | Excel Programming | |||
recursive sums | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
Recursive Subs? | Excel Programming |