Kirk Bevins wrote:Sorry Laurent, there was no 50 in it. It was a 25Laurent wrote:
Sorry Craig, but there was no 25 in it. It was a 50
My version:
4 x 50 = 200
200 + 8 = 208
208 x 4 = 832
832 + 2 = 835
Yes, I got them muddled up. Thanks for putting me on the right path.