Cost of lack increased by 30%
new cost of lack will be = 100% + 30% = 130%
We are given that new cost = £65
Thus 130% of original cost = 65
100% of original cost = 65 × 100/130 = £50
Thus original price was £50
Answer:
3
Step-by-step explanation:
I think it three sometimes it's a trick question
so its not number one or 2 because how are they her children so the answer is 3
From the stemplot, it can be taken that:
Both were very consistent home run hitters, due to the great amount of seasons with at least 20 home runs. Bonds had the biggest outlier, with a season of 73 home runs, while Aaron distribution was less spread.
-------------------------------
- From the stemplot, it can be taken that Bonds had the biggest outlier, which was the season with 73 home runs.
- His season with the lowest amount of home runs was also less than Aaron, as he had a 5 home run season while Aaron lowest amount was 10.
- They both had a lot of seasons with at least 20 home runs, so both very consistent.
Thus, we can take that:
Both were very consistent home run hitters, due to the great amount of seasons with at least 20 home runs. Bonds had the biggest outlier, with a season of 73 home runs, while Aaron distribution was less spread.
A similar problem is given at brainly.com/question/24341344
