The price of one more-expensive blouse) . . . . . P
The cost for three of them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 P
The price of one less-expensive blouse . . . . . P - 3
The cost for three of them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3(P-3) = 3P - 9
The cost for all six blouses . . . . . 3P + (3P - 9)
That's $91.50 . 3P + (3P - 9) = $91.50
3P + 3P - 9 = $91.50
Combine like terms: 6P - 9 = $91.50
Add 9 to each side: 6P = $100.50
Divide each side by 6 : P = $16.75
Each more-expensive blouse cost $16.75 .
Each less-expensive blouse cost $13.75 .
Check: 3 ($16.75) + 3 ($13.75)
= $50.25 + $41.25
= $91.50 yay !
Answer:
2
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
Graph
Step-by-step explanation:
for 5 tickets it would cost $40 but on the graph it shows $1.
It's been a while since I looked at this type of wording on problems.... so correct me if i'm wrong but I believe the answer is FALSE.
because: 0 x any number(doesn't matter if its negative) = 0
Answer:
It is not accurate because only information from teenagers was used to make the claim.
Step-by-step explanation:
This is the correct answer because they only used the data that pertained to their teen readers. The magazine does not only have teen readers, but has many ages. The statement regarding internet use generalizes it to all readers, not just teens, therefore making its claim inaccurate because the scope of inference is not appropriate for the claim that was made.