1111 x 1111 = 1111000 + 111100 + 11110 + 1111 = 1234321

Notice the pattern: 11 x 11 = 121 111 x 111 = 12321 1111 x 1111 = 1234321 11111 x 11111 = 123454321 ...

 
rominet:
1111 x 1111 = 1111000 + 111100 + 11110 + 1111 = 1234321

Notice the pattern: 11 x 11 = 121 111 x 111 = 12321 1111 x 1111 = 1234321 11111 x 11111 = 123454321 ...

Nice try, but there is no way you would be able to come up with a patern like that in your head while stressed out interviewing, plus adding up 1111000 + 111100 + 11110 + 1111 in your head is pretty challenging.

The way I did it in my head was like I would do it on a piece of paper and it took me about 5 seconds.

            1111

x 1111

  -----          1111
    ---      1111
     -   1111
      1111

and just add the numbers up vertically to get 1234321

 

Walk into an interview and the first thing that happens is that one of the partners throws me a quarter. He says "if you stack quarters one on top of another, how many will you need to reach the top of the Sears (Willis now) Tower?" Follow up to that, "if you take all those quarters to cover the area of this paper, can you reach the floor of this room to the ceiling?" Followed by how many fish are in the world?

 

You have 50 white balls, 50 black balls, and two buckets. How should you allocate the balls (you have to use them all) so that you have the best probability of pulling a white ball out of a random bucket?

 
pantherdb26:
You have 50 white balls, 50 black balls, and two buckets. How should you allocate the balls (you have to use them all) so that you have the best probability of pulling a white ball out of a random bucket?

I'd put 25 black balls in the bottom of each barrel and 25 white balls on top of the black ones. Maybe not what you were looking for, but it would guarantee you a 100% chance of grabbing a white ball, no matter the barrel you picked from (assuming that you didn't dig into the bottom and that the circumference of the barrel isn't too large).

 
pantherdb26:
You have 50 white balls, 50 black balls, and two buckets. How should you allocate the balls (you have to use them all) so that you have the best probability of pulling a white ball out of a random bucket?

Put 1 ball in the first bucket, then the rest of the balls in another. Your probability for picking a white ball will in this way be maximized :)

 

This last one is a trick question isn't it? if you are picking out of a "random bucket" then you might as well be picking from a huge bucket with all the balls in it. no matter what you do your chances will be 50/50

right?

 
  1. Do this by induction. Suppose the chessboard is 1x1. Then there is clearly 1 square in total. Now, 2x2. here you have 1 square that has dimension 2x2, and 4 squares that have dimension 1x1. Making 1+4 = 5 in total. Now 3x3. you have 1square that is 3x3, 4 that are 2x2 and 9 that are 1x1. Making 1+4+9 = 14.

Noticing a pattern?

If you have a nxn chessboard. You will have 1 nxn square, 4 (n-1)x(n-1), 9 (n-2)x(n-2) .....

Or more concisely, for i = 1 to n, you have i^2 squares of size (n+1-i).

So to find the total number of squares in an nxn chessboard, just add the first n squares.

In this case, it's 1^2 + 2^2 ........+ 8^2.

-MBP
 
  1. Ask if you can draw it on a piece of paper with 8 square by 8 squares since it makes it a lot easier to visualize.

start with the smallest square combo so you instantly have 64. I started with 8 after, but you can easily do it with 1,2 and the pattern should be just as easy to recognize. 8 block squares = 1 (the entire board), 7 block squares = 4, 6 block squares = 9...at this point you need to tell the interview that using the pattern you would assume that 5 block squares = 16, 4= 25, 3=36, 2=49, 1 =64 (which I already did). Add them up and you get 204 squares.

  1. I am not really sure of all the rules but would 1 +2/3 +.02 be a possibility---using all digits and uses 2 twice.
"Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."
 

Sorry, I was referring to the post by streetlegend.

gekko, I also thought that yours might work, but it's not an exact answer, if we are told that we can round to the nearest hundredth, then it would be 1 +2/3 +0.01, which has the same problem I outlined earlier.

-MBP
 
everythingsucks:
Sorry, I was referring to the post by streetlegend.

gekko, I also thought that yours might work, but it's not an exact answer, if we are told that we can round to the nearest hundredth, then it would be 1 +2/3 +0.01, which has the same problem I outlined earlier.

let me help you out right there, they really don't give a fuck what the answer is. The purpose of the question(s) is to see how your mind works...in that problem's case, do you have simple problem solving skills and can you make numbers work work to your advantage. As you can see there are multiple ways to get the same answer, which makes this probably the best brainteaser related to IBD I have ever seen,,,I mean that is what a banker does, takes numbers that normally equal 6 and makes them look like 7.65. Don't get hung up on the technicals of rounding too much. I am sure that those two above answers would have been acceptable to the interviewer, but you can ask him about rounding.

"Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."
 

1)

For a NxN Chessboard: 1. You get NxN 1-squres. 2. You get (N-1)x(N-1) 2-squres--going left to right you get (N-1) 2-squares, and likewise going down. 3. You get (N-2)x(N-2) 3-qaures--same logic; just draw a picture and check. ... N. You get 1 N-square.

So it's simply 1+2^2+...+7^2+8^2. There's a formula for the sum of squares but I'm sure the interviewer will be satisfied enough with that expression.

 

1) I would say 8*8=64, if you don't remember a chess board is 8 by 8 you can count the number of different chess pieces when you set it up

2) I did 2-(1/3)+.02 or 2-(1/3)+.01 if they get mad about the rounding

 
PooSlinger:
put 1 white ball in one bucket and the rest in the other bucket.

Pretty sure that no matter how you divide them, you will get the same 50/50 split.

(1/50).5 + (49/50).5 = .5 (20/50).5 + (30/50).5= .5

That's why I just said put the 25 black balls on the bottom, then put the 25 white balls on top of the black ones. I could be wrong on this one, but it makes sense to me.

 
AverageGuy:
PooSlinger:
put 1 white ball in one bucket and the rest in the other bucket.

Pretty sure that no matter how you divide them, you will get the same 50/50 split.

(1/50).5 + (49/50).5 = .5 (20/50).5 + (30/50).5= .5

That's why I just said put the 25 black balls on the bottom, then put the 25 white balls on top of the black ones. I could be wrong on this one, but it makes sense to me.

Who said you have to put 50 balls in each bucket? I agree with 1 white in one bucket and the 99 others in the other.

 
PooSlinger:
put 1 white ball in one bucket and the rest in the other bucket.
I'm pretty sure this answer is correct, assuming the odds of picking any given bucket is 50% and not dependant on the number of balls in the bucket.

You have eight weights and a balance (scale that determines which side weighs more). Exactly one weight is heavier than the others. What is the minimum number of times you need to use the balance to determine which weight is heaviest?

 
IlliniProgrammer:
You have eight weights and a balance (scale that determines which side weighs more). Exactly one weight is heavier than the others. What is the minimum number of times you need to use the balance to determine which weight is heaviest?

I was asked a variation of this brain teaser by an MD during a FT interview. He asked how one could find the heaviest weight using the scale only twice. Hadn't heard it before, but I worked through it and got the right answer. I ended up getting an offer, and I'm pretty sure that correctly answering this brain teaser made the difference.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
PooSlinger:
put 1 white ball in one bucket and the rest in the other bucket.
I'm pretty sure this answer is correct, assuming the odds of picking any given bucket is 50% and not dependant on the number of balls in the bucket.

You have eight weights and a balance (scale that determines which side weighs more). Exactly one weight is heavier than the others. What is the minimum number of times you need to use the balance to determine which weight is heaviest?

easy, its 2 times.

divide into 3 groups. weigh two groups, and you'll find out which group the heavy weight is in. eliminate all other groups. weigh 2 of the weights in the heavy group and voila.

damn i wish i got some some these questions...they sound pretty easy to me

 

For the question about the buckets and balls I'd put 49 white balls and 50 black balls in one bucket and one white ball in the other bucket. I could be wrong about that. I never got any probability questions in my interviews but got a few things like "how much does a 747 weigh? How many people voted in X City last year? How many boxing gloves were sold in X state last year?"

 

2 is high school science 3 is in every puzzle book and 4 is middle/high school math - anyone who cannot immediately get them should be dinged 1 is retarded 5 involves "lateral thinking" which most companies explicitly choose not to test because it is stupid to test for.

 

For the mental arithmetic ones you guys should look at vedic mathematics. My grandfather taught it to me growing up and it means I can pretty much do any simple mathematical problem in a few seconds. Just an example:

45^2 always ends in 25 and starts with 4 times one more than 4 so 4 x 5 = 20. Put them together and you get 2025

35^2 = 1225 (3x4)

65^2 = 4225

etc

 

I got one during interview (successfull) in one of the Big4 firms. The clock shows 3-15 time. What is the angle (exactly, without rounding, of course) between hour and minute hands.

Not a tough one but I liked it a lot (coincidence?).

 

Is it better to be up front and say you don't know if a brainteaser really baffles you, or better to try even if you get it totally wrong?

"Do whatever it takes to keep the legend of Wall Street as it was truly intended live on. When you think back on investment banking of the early 21st century, remember the heat—remember the passion. But mostly, remember the titans. " - LSO
 
Soul_Reaper:
Is it better to be up front and say you don't know if a brainteaser really baffles you, or better to try even if you get it totally wrong?
If you don't know, but have any semi-intelligent thoughts, just tell your interviewer(s) that you aren't quite sure but this is how you're thinking about it...... They might give you a hint that will help you solve it.
 

You are given 13 balls and a scale. Of the 13 balls, 12 are identical and 1 weighs slightly more. How do you find the heavier ball using the scale only three times?

Pretend you have a bucket of water, a 5 liter container and a 3 liter container. How do you come up with exactly 4 liters of water?

During consulting interview, interviewer said I could pick one and usually people don't get it right. Told him I knew both, and explained them in like a minute each. Pretty easy in my opinion.

Frank Sinatra - "Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the bible says love your enemy."
 

Yeah, this was a social experiment. Didn't expect this many people to be familiar with Fermat's last theorem/wiles' proof on WSO.

And yeah, you need really advanced graduate level math to even begin understanding the proof. You have to admit, with the mathematical ineptitude displayed in some of the brain teaser threads, it wasn't that farfetched to think most people here wouldn't recognize it on sight.

 

This logic puzzle, on the other hand, actually is very hard. It's not conceptually a brain teaser, per se, but requires really deep logical thought. You practically need to do everything based on symbolic logic.

"Three gods A, B, and C are called, in no particular order, True, False, and Random. True always speaks truly, False always speaks falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B, and C by asking three yes-no questions; each question must be put to exactly one god. The gods understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language, in which the words for yes and no are da and ja, in some order. You do not know which word means which. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hardest_Logic_Puzzle_Ever

 
al865149:
You have an unlimited supply of quarters, dimes, nickels, and pennies. What is the greatest value you can reach such that the coins that you have chosen cannot be rearranged to equal exactly $1.00?

solution: imagine there is a bowl in front of you. take the bowl, your coins, and carry out the following steps:

[step 1] pick a denomination, d, that has not yet been selected. if there are no denominations left to choose from, stop. otherwise, go to step 2.

[step 2] determine the maximum number, n, of coins of denomination d that you can put in the bowl such that you cannot, even with the change in bowl from any previous steps, make change for a dollar. then, go to step 3.

[step 3] put n coins of denomination d in the bowl. then, go to step 1.

so, if i go dimes, quarters, nickels, then pennies, we get: 9 dimes + 1 quarter + 0 nickels + 4 pennies. no matter which denomination you start with, the max is $1.19

 

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask questions that are clearly too hard to solve in an interview. Depending on the question, the candidate can still make some progress, demonstrate their ability to think about really difficult math/problem solving, and show that they are not overconfident.

Off the top of my head this problem isn't a good one for an interview, but my point is just that being (nearly) unsolvably difficult doesn't rule out a problem as a good interview question.

 

"Follow up to that, "if you take all those quarters to cover the area of this paper, can you reach the floor of this room to the ceiling?""

I got asked something like this once. Guy asked me, if there was a stack of quarters the height of the building, what market i would make in the percentage of the office we'd need to hold them all.

 

That's a nasty interview question. I had a question like it in an algorithms class.

This professor gives a good overview of the reasoning behind it (adapt it for 50 cards): http://recursed.blogspot.com/2010/01/neat-problem-on-card-arrangements…

Was this Grandmaster Capital? It sounds like a question they would give, given the Clarium heritage and Patrick Wolff's genius level mind.

 
West Coast rainmaker:
That's a nasty interview question. I had a question like it in an algorithms class.

This professor gives a good overview of the reasoning behind it (adapt it for 50 cards): http://recursed.blogspot.com/2010/01/neat-problem-on-card-arrangements…

Was this Grandmaster Capital? It sounds like a question they would give, given the Clarium heritage and Patrick Wolff's genius level mind.

That awkward moment when you realize that professor, is your professor... (Ian Gouldon not the other fellow)

 

Assuming the cards are in a circle instead of a line so every card will have two other cards next to them. Their are four aces, which can be taken as a given, 8 cards will be next to the aces (which could include another ace, a king, or a blank card).

I would think of it as what are the odds of it not happening. You get 8 trials, where each trial incorporates one less card to pull from, increasing (slightly) the odds that each next card is a king next to the ace.

1- ((45/49)x(44/48)x(43/47)x(42/46)x(41/45)x(40/44)x(39/43)x(38/42)) = 52.2%

Is that what you got?

 
SirPoopsaLot:
Assuming the cards are in a circle instead of a line so every card will have two other cards next to them. Their are four aces, which can be taken as a given, 8 cards will be next to the aces (which could include another ace, a king, or a blank card).

I would think of it as what are the odds of it not happening. You get 8 trials, where each trial incorporates one less card to pull from, increasing (slightly) the odds that each next card is a king next to the ace.

1- ((45/49)x(44/48)x(43/47)x(42/46)x(41/45)x(40/44)x(39/43)x(38/42)) = 52.2%

Is that what you got?

Simulating it with 1,000,000,000 trials I got 50.1%

When I started it on paper I also modeled it as a circle. I don't think your method is correct, though, because the number of places where an ace can be next to a king depends on the particular distribution of aces; i.e., given four aces placed there may be anywhere from two to five places where a king may be placed to satisfy the requirement (in the circular model) or one to five (in the linear model).

This was my approach:

1) How many ways are there to place four aces in fifty locations? (50 nCr 4) 2) How many of those have 2, 3, 4, 5 "sweet spots"? 3) What is the probability of missing all of those "sweet spots" with your four kings, for each number of sweet spots?

It basically comes down to the weighted sum of the complements of missing all of the sweet spots.

Also note that in the circular arrangement there are slightly more ways to get the win.

 

Thanks for the solution and the question I asked to you guys was the simplified version of the question. In the real question my interviewer asked:

Q = interviewer D = me

Q:Pick two cards. (King, Queen, Ace...) D: Ace and Jack Q: You like blackjack? D: Yea, more of a poker player, but still fun from time to time. Q: Well, you aren't playing poker or blackjack. You are playing the probability game and here it is:

  1. What is the probability I will have one of your cards if I remove two of them? This was fairly straightforward if you have some statistical background. It's a straightforward combination so 1 - (44C2)/(52C2) = .287 -Before he told me whether it was right or wrong he drew two cards from the deck. They weren't a Jack or Ace if you were wondering. Next he told me my calculation was correct. (Obviously I had to explain why the combination and why I got the probability of it not happening.)

Following this he asked the most difficult question:

  1. What is the probability that a Ace lays next to a Jack in this deck of cards? (show me deck of cards)

I then started talking about how all the other 42 cards are irrelevant. Hence the blank cards. I think the rest of my explanation sounded alright, but who knows. After this question he then switched it up about asking me about something on my resume.

Robert Clayton Dean: What is happening? Brill: I blew up the building. Robert Clayton Dean: Why? Brill: Because you made a phone call.
 

don't know if this is right, but i wouldve approached it using combinatorics.

So you have 8 kings and aces, and you can use PIE to try to count how many combos there are that let you win. You could then break into the event that you have at least 1 pair, then subtract event that you have at least 2, add event that you have at least 3, then subtract that you have at least 4. And then for each event multiply by the number of possible ways to arrange.

So for example the #combos that you have at least 1 pair is 4C14C1 * 49!. You choose a king and an ace and stick them together and view them as 1 card. Since you would then only have 49 "cards" (its 50 - 1 since you have 1 pair) to distribute, there are 49! ways to place everything. But this will double count when you have 2 pairs, you have to apply PIE and subtract out the #combos of at least 2 pairs which is 4C24C2*48!, then add back the 3 pairs, and then subtract the 4 pairs. Then divide that number by 50!.

so you get something like (4C14C149! - 4C24C248! + 4C34C347! +4C44C446!)/50! cancel stuff out and you have 16/50 - 36/(5049) + 16/(504948) -1/(50494847)~15/50 since the last 2 terms are really small

 
pig:
don't know if this is right, but i wouldve approached it using combinatorics.

So you have 8 kings and aces, and you can use PIE to try to count how many combos there are that let you win. You could then break into the event that you have at least 1 pair, then subtract event that you have at least 2, add event that you have at least 3, then subtract that you have at least 4. And then for each event multiply by the number of possible ways to arrange.

So for example the #combos that you have at least 1 pair is 4C14C1 * 49!. You choose a king and an ace and stick them together and view them as 1 card. Since you would then only have 49 "cards" (its 50 - 1 since you have 1 pair) to distribute, there are 49! ways to place everything. But this will double count when you have 2 pairs, you have to apply PIE and subtract out the #combos of at least 2 pairs which is 4C24C2*48!, then add back the 3 pairs, and then subtract the 4 pairs. Then divide that number by 50!.

so you get something like (4C14C149! - 4C24C248! + 4C34C347! +4C44C446!)/50! cancel stuff out and you have 16/50 - 36/(5049) + 16/(504948) -1/(50494847)~15/50 since the last 2 terms are really small

You win if you have at least one "pair" -- the two, three, four pair cases include the at least one pair case which satisfies the victory condition.

 

The cards are not laid out in a circular manner. I asked him this during the interview.

Robert Clayton Dean: What is happening? Brill: I blew up the building. Robert Clayton Dean: Why? Brill: Because you made a phone call.
 

I'm not going to work this out, but for future reference you should always try to use some form of induction. Whether that's induction on the total number of cards or the number of kings/aces depends on what you feel more comfortable attempting first. Once you can solve it for some base cases, you generally start seeing patterns on how to generalize to an arbitrary set.

-MBP
 

Given the wide range of answers here (with ample time and no pressure), it's safe to assume that they were more interested in your thought process and whether you looked compose rather than looking like you took a shit in your pants. If you got it right tho, then hat-tip to you sir.

Capitalist
 

Thanks for the responses. I received an email today saying I would hear back at the latest by Friday. If I get the internship I'm gonna ask my interviewer for the answer. ;)

Robert Clayton Dean: What is happening? Brill: I blew up the building. Robert Clayton Dean: Why? Brill: Because you made a phone call.
 

Question 2 is a perfect answer, great job. Will definitely show the interviewer (IF YOU GET THE QUESTION) that you can first do the rational thing and then think outside the box when the answer looks funky.

Question 1 do you really think you'll be able to do all that math in your head? And isn't the answer the 59th minute?

If the bacteria doubles every minute and takes one hour to fill the pond then:

1 hour = 1.0 (full pond)

59 min = 1.0 / 2.0 = 0.5 (Half full)

58 min = 0.5 / 2.0 = 0.25 (Quarter full)

so on...

Hopefully you realize though that it is just pure luck when it comes to brainteasers. Obviously you can read and try to memorize a bunch of them but the main thing you want to get from reading / looking at solutions to brainteasers is the critical thinking element. They all have a common way of approaching a problem and the more you do the more you'll learn to take different factors into consideration, etc...

 

Now that I've been studying for the GMAT, a lot of the 'brainteasers' are actually really simple mathematic concepts/functions; though not really common in subjects studied during college such as calculus.

I'd look over some of the more talked about topics for GMAT math as they help go over the basic concepts that seem to be asked in brainteasers e.g. combinatorics, exponential growth, rates/work, algebraic translations. It's basically math you did in high school, but forgot about.

'Before you enter... be willing to pay the price'
 
TechBanking:
.9 repeated has a limit value of 1, but is never actually 1.

This statement makes no sense at it stands. If you mean to say constructing a sequence where each additional term is made by appending another 9, then yes, this sequence has a limit of 1. If you mean the number .9 repeating, well, it's a constant, so its "limit value" must be itself. By the way, that is most definitely 1.

 
JDimon:
Yes - my simplest 'explain in english' is that .3 repeating is generally known to equal one third, and 3 times one third equals 1

That's a good way to explain it. Also if 1/3 = .3 repeating 2/3= .6 repeating

Add them together and you get

3/3=.9 repeating 1=.9 repeating

 
JDimon:
Let me also do it with math:

10*x equals 9.999

Assuming you mean 10* .999 repeating = 9.999 repeating, this step is only true if the series converges (i.e it equals 1). In order to finish your proof you essentially assumed that what you were proving was true.

Are you retarded?

 

Here's my answer:

Yes. When you want a repeated decimal, you just take that number and divided it by 9. 0.7777.....=7/9 0.5555.....=5/9

Thus, 0.999999.....should theoretically equal 9/9, and 9/9 = 1.

Do I get the SB?

 

The answer is yes. There is a long mathematical proof that you learn in calc 2.

But the easy straightforward answer is...

1/3 = .3 Repeated 2/3 = .6 Repeated

Add the two previous

3/3 = .9 Repeated

 

There are several ways of showing this. An alternate version is using infinite series.

Let S(i) = i_Sum_k=1 .9*10^(-k)

And so .99 repeated is just Lim_(i--> infiniti) S(i)

But S(i) = .9* (1-10^(-i-1))/(1-1/10)

So Lim_(i--> infiniti) = .9*(1/(1-1/10)) = 1

-MBP
 

Numbers are concepts. If the number isn't the same number, then it's not the same number. The idea of .9 repeating is that its as close as possible to 1 without actually being 1. Otherwise it would be 1. So I'm gonna ruin all the fun and say it's not possible based on the idea of what numbers are.

I hate victims who respect their executioners
 
BlackHat:
Numbers are concepts. If the number isn't the same number, then it's not the same number. The idea of .9 repeating is that its as close as possible to 1 without actually being 1. Otherwise it would be 1. So I'm gonna ruin all the fun and say it's not possible based on the idea of what numbers are.
No it's a fact that .9 repeating is another representation of 1. There are many proofs for it. It's not counterintuitive if you look at how the real numbers are constructed.
-MBP
 

Put one blue in one vase. 100% chance of grabbing a blue ball. Put the other 19 into the other vase. 9/19 chance of grabbing blue ball.

Second scenario is to put 1 blue each in 10 vases and then put 10black into one vase.

 

One? No fucking way. As someone who hikes/climbs mountains quite frequently, I can confidently say the probability of you walking at a constant rate both up and down the mountain is close to zero.

But hey, lesson learned. You always have to ask clarifying questions when the information you're given is vague. I'm sure they would have said the walk was at a constant rate if you asked them.

 

My take: If you use the same route up and down (likely) and have the same speed (less likely), then it should be 1, as you will cross the same point at the same time halfway through your route. If you have different speeds up and down or use different routes, I don't see it happening at all.

 
TeamLRAM:
The answer is 1

if you draw a line graph, with x-axis being hour of the day (from 6AM to 6PM) and y-axis being altitude from (base to summit), the two paths will always cross

^ Yeah he's right. Think about it this way:

if instead of you walking down the mountain the next day, your friend is walking down the mountain the same day. what's the probability that you two will hit the exact same point at the same time? so answer is 1.

 

A wealthy man tells his two sons that they (the two sons) will race for his fortune. The two sons will race camels from town A to town B, and the son whose camel is the slowest to reach town B will win. After riding around in the desert for days, the two sons meet a wise man and ask for advice. The wise man tells the sons something, after which the sons get back on the camels and ride toward town B as quickly as they can.

What did the wise man tell the sons?

 
AverageGuy:
A wealthy man tells his two sons that they (the two sons) will race for his fortune. The two sons will race camels from town A to town B, and the son whose camel is the slowest to reach town B will win. After riding around in the desert for days, the two sons meet a wise man and ask for advice. The wise man tells the sons something, after which the sons get back on the camels and ride toward town B as quickly as they can.

What did the wise man tell the sons?

lol, he tells them to switch camels.

I used to think the answer was that the wise men told them that since neither son would ever want to win the race, thus rendering it impossible for the fortune to ever be inherited, it would be mutually beneficial to let one of them win and split the fortune. silly me

 
asianracist:
say cube of a single digit number, square of 2-digit number, 3-digit number*2-digit number? what else?

And, say one of my interview questions is 153 * 67 should i come up with an exact answer? or an approximation is actually suitable? like 150*70?

What is the exact question? Was this for a mostly Asian trading firm?

 

Dolor ut et quia dolorum amet nihil qui qui. Nam est sit eius deserunt. Recusandae non dicta voluptatem quia labore consectetur. Suscipit consequatur aperiam non autem minima voluptatem. Reprehenderit non aspernatur in. Aspernatur quibusdam autem numquam consequatur culpa tenetur magnam sit. Molestiae adipisci explicabo autem deleniti est ipsa id.

Debitis consequatur dolores ratione quam rerum. Aut corporis optio ut fugit. Eum illum cumque minima amet.

I haven't had a carb since 2004.
 

Voluptatem tenetur illum animi dolore magni mollitia. Et voluptate qui ea officiis id repellat et veniam. Ut facilis a facilis nobis ad cupiditate. A ipsum et reprehenderit provident dolores in distinctio.

Debitis quam maiores nihil aliquam architecto enim. Excepturi eum quos tempora architecto tempora. Voluptatum et consequatur et autem ab laudantium. Fuga numquam atque id ut.

Non aut velit et doloremque exercitationem. Fugiat consequatur adipisci sit aperiam id voluptate.

Earum voluptas facilis et iusto consequatur necessitatibus qui ut. Velit optio laborum enim qui eum aut error. Fugit magni eveniet ut quo rem. Debitis voluptas laudantium id illum ut laborum dolorum cumque. Asperiores neque odit doloribus fuga laborum tenetur.

 

In eveniet mollitia optio fugiat voluptates. Eos qui expedita blanditiis. Fugiat dolor dolor laboriosam deleniti. Voluptatum voluptatem temporibus nihil aliquid est. Sit laborum deserunt id in magni.

Temporibus accusamus maiores quaerat est. Culpa et non quia qui quibusdam.

Repudiandae asperiores repellat dolorem qui dignissimos excepturi aperiam aut. Dolorem et tempore ut sequi velit. Rerum possimus soluta quis cumque aut saepe. Ratione et cum consequuntur veniam et soluta quibusdam rerum. Iusto illo repellendus laboriosam sunt qui. Ipsa totam dolore est vel ducimus.

 

Qui labore consectetur incidunt voluptas dolorem qui quis dolorem. Perspiciatis suscipit occaecati iure veniam praesentium. Rerum labore est perferendis quidem sed.

Enim voluptatum at voluptatem fuga explicabo eaque ea. Dolorem velit voluptate qui minima aliquam sit asperiores. Quas quia optio consectetur praesentium. Officiis suscipit optio ipsum eveniet.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”