spilldig   188 #133 Posted December 17, 2017 Who's this "they"? If the Bank of England decided there were to be 100 pennies in a pound then the calculation was done and set in stone. If then some retailers decided to do their own conversion and added a few pence here and there then it is the retailers who are to blame, in short they were on the fiddle. That is not the fault of metrication that's a failing of capitalism, another argument for another day.  Who would want to go back to a currency that doesnt even add up properly?  They is retailers, and the government should have had the brains to see what would happen, as everyone else did, and left things as they were. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ontarian1981   10 #134 Posted December 17, 2017 (edited) Care to show your working ? We can’t both be right altho’ both of us could be wrong.  You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL Edited December 17, 2017 by Ontarian1981 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #135 Posted December 17, 2017 Thank god there's no longer a need to work out how much 4' 7 1/2" of material costs at £1 19s 6d a yard. I think it’s Three pounds and tenpence three farthings. I calculate to £3/1/2d rounding up. You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL  Three different answers. Not much of an argument for using imperial units and pre-decimal currency. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ontarian1981 Â Â 10 #136 Posted December 17, 2017 Three different answers. Not much of an argument for using imperial units and pre-decimal currency. Â Touche Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
carosio   186 #137 Posted December 17, 2017 Touche  Only small errors though -unlike putting the decimal point in the wrong place! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ontarian1981 Â Â 10 #138 Posted December 17, 2017 Only small errors though -unlike putting the decimal point in the wrong place! Â I wouldn't mind my pension deposits having the decimal point a little bit further to the right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
carosio   186 #139 Posted December 17, 2017 (edited) You ARE both wrong, it's three pounds and sixpence ha'penny. LOL  £1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up)  4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so  55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d  If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure. Edited December 17, 2017 by carosio Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B   1,414 #140 Posted December 17, 2017 Decimalisation was going to turn us into a nation of maths geniuses. How did that work out?  Well, it certainly didn't work in my case... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ontarian1981   10 #141 Posted December 17, 2017 (edited) £1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up) 4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so  55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d  If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure.  I never work things out conventionally, it's a habit I have. I got where I got to by saying to myself all I have to do is put a value to a inch and a half as 4' 6" is obvious as it is a straight yard and a half . Edited December 17, 2017 by Ontarian1981 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Annie Bynnol   612 #142 Posted December 17, 2017 £1/19/6d per yard =1/1d per inch (rounded up)  4ft 7 ½ins = 55 1/2ins so  55 ½ x 1/1d = 60 sh 1 ½ d = £3/0/1 ½ d  If you added the fractions of farthings, it might be close to your figure.  or  £1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard 474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch 4' 7½" = 55½" So cost is 730.45 pence Which is £3.0s.10d  The method of calculation varies by a packet of 10 cigarettes in 1971. The error/tolerance in the measurement of the wood might seem to some insignificant but if you were building an estate the potential for fraud would be and was huge If it was engineering metal the costs and inaccuracy would also be very much greater. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
carosio   186 #143 Posted December 17, 2017 or £1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard 474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch 4' 7½" = 55½" So cost is 730.45 pence Which is £3.0s.10d  The method of calculation varies by a packet of 10 cigarettes in 1971. The error/tolerance in the measurement of the wood might seem to some insignificant but if you were building an estate the potential for fraud would be and was huge If it was engineering metal the costs and inaccuracy would also be very much greater.  Yes, although I was calculating on the nearest whole ha'pennies or farthings rather than small fractions or decimal points. Someone selling a few yards of cloth (at that time) probably wouldn't have used those so, your 16/100 could be rounded up to a farthing, or ignored. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Mossway   15 #144 Posted December 17, 2017 or £1/19/6d per yard =474 pence per yard 474 pence per yard= 13 16/100 pence per inch 4' 7½" = 55½" So cost is 730.45 pence Which is £3.0s.10d  It’s 13point166666666 d/inch recurring, which, when mutiplied by 55point5 is 730.75d which is Three pounds and tenpence three farthings (I can’t seem to do fractions on this iPad) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...