Did I make a mistake?

[tikker]

I see three aspects to this story, but ultimately it all depends on what the $500 was for exactly:

1. You were offered money for a phone. How specifically tied to purchasing a phone is this money? If you both agreed on the $500 split and it was mostly, but not really only for a phone, but also just a general gift, then you don't owe her anything in my opinion.
2. Your sister was offered a phone by someone else, but refused for luxury reasons (doesn't like Android), while you accepted. She is facing the consequences of her actions.
3. How was the offer of the S20 related to the money offer? If it wasn't intentional to help you save more of the money then I would say find a way to remedy the situation. Otherwise, I don't think something unfair happened.

If the money was really meant for a phone, then you could also solve it differently: your sister gets $500 and you return your $500. Anything not spent from that $500 would then also be returned of course. This would be completely fair in my opinion, because from what I gather you both agreed on a 50/50 split to $500 each.

 

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Or you could argue, that it was foolish from B to not take the phone and they should now be punished and receive only $500 (wasn't that you point?) .

Well yes, in a way. I don't see this as punishment as much as experiencing the consequences of your decisions. It would be pretty convenient if we could quicksave before every decision, but alas that feature has not been implemented. As you point out, the money was labeled for a phone, so I think finding out how strict that label was meant to be is the most important point. I think it is also important to consider that both OP and sister seem to have agreed on a 50/50 split and that both were offered the phone, but that one refused for luxury reasons.

 

OP said that their sister refused because they don't like Android. That is completely fine, but on that aspect they looked a gift horse in the mouth and now have to deal with the consequences. Refusing one offer does not entitle you to (more of) a different one. If OP accepting the phone is unfair to his sister and needs to hand over part of his budget to her, then you can also argue that his sister now having more money for a phone is unfair to OP. After all, he only got a "$200" phone now (or whatever the S20's value is) while his sister would be able to get an $800 (or $1000 minus $S20) phone. If OP had known that they could have refused the phone and taken the $500 to get a better one.

[HenrySalayne]

43 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Only in your clown world would that be logical.

And here I thought the OP was the youngest participant in this discussion, but you proved me wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

54 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Let's spin your train of thought a bit further:

No. You understand the concept of a discussion? You have my statement and you can now argue why the disputed part of this statement is in your opinion wrong. Then it's a discussion. But you once again create an imaginary statement and argue against that.

Let's get to the disputed point. I count the S20FE as a part of the pot. You are not counting the S20FE as part of the pot. My arguments were "it was offered to both of them", "it fulfils the purpose of the money given by their grandparents" and "there is still plenty of money to spend on a switch factoring in the S20FE". Your point was "It's a different transaction" (IMHO not a very good point).

Maybe we should cut a corner here and just agree that the S20FE is part of the pot, but you value it with $0 and I value it with roughly $200 (could be less, could be more, but that's not really relevant). So it becomes a question of which value you would attribute to the S20FE in the situation at hand and why.

 

58 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Money as a gift is not tied to specific purpose.

Yes, it is. BTW:

On 1/29/2023 at 11:08 AM, Nior2008 said:

My grandparents gave me and my sister $1000 to share to get new phones

It's literally in the first sentence.

 

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

If someone gifts me money for a specific purpose, I reserve the right to use it for anything I please.

I think we all noticed that you don't follow normal social conventions. Some would also argue that if I say "here is some money for a new dishwasher" and you spend that money on anything but a dishwasher you broke an oral agreement.

 

1 minute ago, tikker said:

Well yes, in a way. I don't see this as punishment as much as experiencing the consequences of your decisions.

Consequence of what? We don't know the reasoning behind her decision.

5 minutes ago, tikker said:

but that one refused for luxury reasons.

Speculation. There a good reasons you want one ecosystem over the other and we know only the (probably distorted) picture the OP draws.

9 minutes ago, tikker said:

then you can also argue that his sister now having more money for a phone is unfair to OP.

Yes and no. But as long as they both receive an equal value, it would be fair, or wouldn't it?

[Bitter]

Ask your grandparents opinion since they gifted the money. You'll score some maturity points with them and your parents, probably get awarded some of the money directly by your grandparents, and your sister still gets a phone out of the deal. You come out on top, if you care about that.

 

On the other hand if your sister is the kind of person to remember kind acts and reciprocate the you can score some good graces by acquiescing, however since you're asking it sounds like she is not that kind of person.

[Avocado Diaboli]

9 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

No. You understand the concept of a discussion? You have my statement and you can now argue why the disputed part of this statement is in your opinion wrong. Then it's a discussion. But you once again create an imaginary statement and argue against that.

Let's get to the disputed point. I count the S20FE as a part of the pot. You are not counting the S20FE as part of the pot. My arguments were "it was offered to both of them", "it fulfils the purpose of the money given by their grandparents" and "there is still plenty of money to spend on a switch factoring in the S20FE". Your point was "It's a different transaction" (IMHO not a very good point).

Maybe we should cut a corner here and just agree that the S20FE is part of the pot, but you value it with $0 and I value it with roughly $200 (could be less, could be more, but that's not really relevant). So it becomes a question of which value you would attribute to the S20FE in the situation at hand and why.

You don't just get to make up rules as you go along to not have your notions challenged. I'm not just gonna agree with your assertion that it's part of the pot as if we've already resolved that step of your cavalcade of assumptions. You understand the concept of a discussion? 

 

11 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

I think we all noticed that you don't follow normal social conventions. Some would also argue that if I say "here is some money for a new dishwasher" and you spend that money on anything but a dishwasher you broke an oral agreement.

You understand the concept of a gift?

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

I'm not just gonna agree with your assertion that it's part of the pot as if we've already resolved that step of your cavalcade of assumptions.

You're missing the point. I'd merely tried to condense the problem into a value discussion instead of having it derailed once again in another direction.

Not adding the phone to the pot and adding a phone with a value of $0 to the pot can be considered exchangeable.

[Avocado Diaboli]

26 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

You're missing the point. I'd merely tried to condense the problem into a value discussion instead of having it derailed once again in another direction.

Not adding the phone to the pot and adding a phone with a value of $0 to the pot can be considered exchangeable.

No, and here's why this is just another attempt at moving the goalposts for you: You admit yourself that the rest of the money could easily be appropriated to buy a Switch, regardless of how the transaction concerning the other phone is considered. So what happened to the fact that those funds were still intended to go towards a phone and not a Switch? See, you first try to discount my notion that these are totally separate transaction on the basis of the facts that they involve entirely unrelated people, but you try to duct tape them together with your insistence that since both concern a phone, they're to be treated as one while at the same time still arguing from a position that would ensure the purchase of a video game console. 

 

You're not condensing anything, you are stripping away the context that reveals that your arguments have no legs to stand on in a feeble attempt to save face. And you still haven't answered any of the questions I posed to you, don't think I haven't noticed. 

[HenrySalayne]

14 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

You're not condensing anything, you are stripping away the context that reveals that your arguments have no legs to stand on in a feeble attempt to save face.

You probably break your neck when you fall from your high horse.

 

It's kind of funny that you think there is only one answer to the problem the OP posted (and it's obviously your answer).

But you can apply three general courses of action:

- altruistic - maximizing the "happiness" of the other party

- utilitaristic - maximizing the "happiness" of both parties

- egoistic - maximizing the "happiness" for yourself

 

Right now there are some favouring an utilitaristic solution, most favour an egoistic solution and nobody favours an altruistic solution. Nevertheless, they all have good arguments in favour and against them.

 

14 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

So what happened to the fact that those funds were still intended to go towards a phone and not a Switch?

What an original thought!

19 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

But you could also argue that A should not get anything from the $1000 because it is bound to a purpose and this purpose has already be fulfilled by other means.

 

 

14 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

See, you first try to discount my notion that these are totally separate transaction on the basis of the facts that they involve entirely unrelated people, but you try to duct tape them together with your insistence that since both concern a phone, they're to be treated as one while at the same time still arguing from a position that would ensure the purchase of a video game console. 

I think you are too fixated that it must have been different events. Imagine the conversation went something like this:

GP: "A and B, Here are $1000 for both of you to get new phones."

BGF: "B, you could have my old phone."

B: "Thanks, but I want an iOS device. Maybe A wants the phone."

A: "Sure, I take the phone."

 

I know, I know. That's not the best screenplay and it could've happened completely different, but: Do you still see two separate events or is it now one event?

[TetraSky]

Sister sounds like an entitled brat.

She snubbed the S20 and now thinks YOU are selfish because you don't want to give what is rightfully yours to her?

You owe her nothing, that money is yours. You didn't look a gift horse in the mouth when it was offered to you. So now you have a phone and $500. It could've been her. But she decided she wanted the latest iPhone. Probably because all her friends have iPhones too and she wants to show off.

 

Just from this interaction, I can guess she will have a lot of trouble with money later in the future. I pity whoever ends up with her.

[Fragment323]

Maybe the simplest take, which involves the least fighting over this and 0 decisionmaking on you part:

Did your grandparents gave each of you 500 separately, or they gave you 1000 to share with your sister?

If each got 500 separately, you dont have to care if you dont want to - and enjoy your 500.

If it was 1000 for both of you to share, than go to your grandparents, explain the situation and let them decide what to do. It is ultimately their money, that they ment to use for your and your sisters gifts.

On one hand, this shifts the decisionmaking away from you - as well as the blame if your sister gets only her 500 and gets upset.
On the other hand, you are not going to loose anything even if they decide she should get the full 1000. You already have a phone that you are happy with and she would get a phone too.

 

[thekingofmonks]

$500 can get her a nice last-gen android-based phone that could run any modern game

She could even cheap out a little to get two phones instead

[airborne spoon]

life aint fair and she should realize buying an iphone is a bad investment anyway and if she insists on buying their crap then get an older one. Regardless the $500 is yours to do with as you please but dont give it to her.

[dalekphalm]

On 1/29/2023 at 5:08 AM, Nior2008 said:

My grandparents gave me and my sister $1000 to share to get new phones, the money was split $500 each so we could each get a phone. 

My oldest brother's gf gave me her old Samsung S20fe so I'm using that phone and I'm happy with it. I was thinking of using my share to get a Nintendo switch lite and a few games, but my sister says since I already have a phone she says I should give her my share to her so she can get a iPhone. I told her No, since it was my share. She says I'm being selfish since I have a phone I should give her my share. 

IMO this depends on your grandparents.

 

Was the money conditional on you getting a new phone, or was that just a suggestion?

 

If the money was specifically for a new phone, and you don't need one, then maybe they want that money back. Or maybe they think your sister should get the rest (IMO I don't think that's necessarily fair either). Or maybe your grandparents don't care, and they will let you spend the money on whatever you want.

 

I don't think your sister should auomatically get the leftover unspent amount though - that's being selfish herself. $500 should get her a really good condition used iPhone if she really wants one.

[Bitter]

22 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

IMO this depends on your grandparents.

 

Was the money conditional on you getting a new phone, or was that just a suggestion?

 

If the money was specifically for a new phone, and you don't need one, then maybe they want that money back. Or maybe they think your sister should get the rest (IMO I don't think that's necessarily fair either). Or maybe your grandparents don't care, and they will let you spend the money on whatever you want.

 

I don't think your sister should auomatically get the leftover unspent amount though - that's being selfish herself. $500 should get her a really good condition used iPhone if she really wants one.

3rd option, donate his portion to charity in his grandparents names. Ultimate power move there

[Nior2008]

9 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

You probably break your neck when you fall from your high horse.

 

It's kind of funny that you think there is only one answer to the problem the OP posted (and it's obviously your answer).

But you can apply three general courses of action:

- altruistic - maximizing the "happiness" of the other party

- utilitaristic - maximizing the "happiness" of both parties

- egoistic - maximizing the "happiness" for yourself

 

Right now there are some favouring an utilitaristic solution, most favour an egoistic solution and nobody favours an altruistic solution. Nevertheless, they all have good arguments in favour and against them.

 

What an original thought!

 

 

I think you are too fixated that it must have been different events. Imagine the conversation went something like this:

GP: "A and B, Here are $1000 for both of you to get new phones."

BGF: "B, you could have my old phone."

B: "Thanks, but I want an iOS device. Maybe A wants the phone."

A: "Sure, I take the phone."

 

I know, I know. That's not the best screenplay and it could've happened completely different, but: Do you still see two separate events or is it now one event?

lol, you made my sis sound so nice. 

My bros gf: hey Karen, I'm getting a upgrade do you want my old.s20fe?

Karen : lol, I don't use android ask the peanut he might want it. 

Me aka her peanut of a kid brother : S20FE sweet my first flagship!! *Sarah pats my head*and Karen laughs... Evily

8 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Sister sounds like an entitled brat.

She snubbed the S20 and now thinks YOU are selfish because you don't want to give what is rightfully yours to her?

You owe her nothing, that money is yours. You didn't look a gift horse in the mouth when it was offered to you. So now you have a phone and $500. It could've been her. But she decided she wanted the latest iPhone. Probably because her friends have iPhones too and she wants to show off.

 

Just from this interaction, I can guess she will have a lot of trouble with money later in the future. I pity whoever ends up with her.

Trust me she's evil, she made dad feel so bad for her dad spent $580 on her red/blue Mario switch + games

6 hours ago, Fragment323 said:

Maybe the simplest take, which involves the least fighting over this and 0 decisionmaking on you part:

Did your grandparents gave each of you 500 separately, or they gave you 1000 to share with your sister?

If each got 500 separately, you dont have to care if you dont want to - and enjoy your 500.

If it was 1000 for both of you to share, than go to your grandparents, explain the situation and let them decide what to do. It is ultimately their money, that they ment to use for your and your sisters gifts.

On one hand, this shifts the decisionmaking away from you - as well as the blame if your sister gets only her 500 and gets upset.
On the other hand, you are not going to loose anything even if they decide she should get the full 1000. You already have a phone that you are happy with and she would get a phone too.

 

Graps gave me the $1000 and said get new phones each if you need to. I did tell gramps Sarah gave me the S20FE. He did say *and I quote* "then do whatever you want but don't waste it on pokemon cards " 

6 hours ago, thekingofmonks said:

$500 can get her a nice last-gen android-based phone that could run any modern game

She could even cheap out a little to get two phones instead

Quotes Karen :" I don't use android* her old phone is dad's old iPhone 7 plus. 

2 hours ago, airborne spoon said:

life aint fair and she should realize buying an iphone is a bad investment anyway and if she insists on buying their crap then get an older one. Regardless the $500 is yours to do with as you please but dont give it to her.

Well she's asking big bro for $800 if she doesn't get my $500 and if Benjamin rejects her she's gonna be dad's problem. 

1 hour ago, Bitter said:

3rd option, donate his portion to charity in his grandparents names. Ultimate power move there

I would but she probably kill me or drown me in the school toilet if I did that. But she my older sister and she's got purple belt in karate and twice my size. 

 

I need to learn to fight, my best friend told me to punch her in her groin, before I could she broke my arm (12yrs old) 14 now

[Bitter]

1 hour ago, Nior2008 said:

lol, you made my sis sound so nice. 

My bros gf: hey Karen, I'm getting a upgrade do you want my old.s20fe?

Karen : lol, I don't use android ask the peanut he might want it. 

Me aka her peanut of a kid brother : S20FE sweet my first flagship!! *Sarah pats my head*and Karen laughs... Evily

Trust me she's evil, she made dad feel so bad for her dad spent $580 on her red/blue Mario switch + games

Graps gave me the $1000 and said get new phones each if you need to. I did tell gramps Sarah gave me the S20FE. He did say *and I quote* "then do whatever you want but don't waste it on pokemon cards " 

Quotes Karen :" I don't use android* her old phone is dad's old iPhone 7 plus. 

Well she's asking big bro for $800 if she doesn't get my $500 and if Benjamin rejects her she's gonna be dad's problem. 

I would but she probably kill me or drown me in the school toilet if I did that. But she my older sister and she's got purple belt in karate and twice my size. 

 

I need to learn to fight, my best friend told me to punch her in her groin, before I could she broke my arm (12yrs old) 14 now

$1000 of MMA classes or $1000 suit of armor

[HenrySalayne]

11 hours ago, Nior2008 said:

lol, you made my sis sound so nice. 

My bros gf: hey Karen, I'm getting a upgrade do you want my old.s20fe?

Karen : lol, I don't use android ask the peanut he might want it. 

Me aka her peanut of a kid brother : S20FE sweet my first flagship!! *Sarah pats my head*and Karen laughs... Evily

That's basically what I said!

 

Hilarious!

 

 

[tikker]

On 1/30/2023 at 7:59 PM, HenrySalayne said:

Consequence of what? We don't know the reasoning behind her decision.

The consequence of refusing a gift, finding out that that does not automatically entitle you to another/better one. We have one insight in her reasoning:

On 1/30/2023 at 8:27 AM, Nior2008 said:

My brother's gf did offer it to her first before me, she said she doesn't like android 

 

On 1/30/2023 at 7:59 PM, HenrySalayne said:

Speculation. There a good reasons you want one ecosystem over the other and we know only the (probably distorted) picture the OP draws.

Sure there are reasons why you may prefer a certain ecosystem, but those reasons do not entitle you to a bigger share of a different offer, or a different offer at all after refusing another one because it doesn't meet your preferences or requirements.

 

On 1/30/2023 at 7:59 PM, HenrySalayne said:

Yes and no. But as long as they both receive an equal value, it would be fair, or wouldn't it?

And they have received equal value: an agreed upon $500 each of a $1000 combined offer. Subtracting the S20FE's value is reasoning from the viewpoint of equal oucome, which is one way to do it. I would say it's also fair to reason from an equal starting point: both get $500 to spend.

 

With OP's new clarification of

12 hours ago, Nior2008 said:

Graps gave me the $1000 and said get new phones each if you need to. I did tell gramps Sarah gave me the S20FE. He did say *and I quote* "then do whatever you want but don't waste it on pokemon cards " 

it seems to have been a more general gift not only for phones

22 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

I think you are too fixated that it must have been different events. Imagine the conversation went something like this:

GP: "A and B, Here are $1000 for both of you to get new phones."

BGF: "B, you could have my old phone."

B: "Thanks, but I want an iOS device. Maybe A wants the phone."

A: "Sure, I take the phone."

 

I know, I know. That's not the best screenplay and it could've happened completely different, but: Do you still see two separate events or is it now one event?

Still two events, unless you assume that BGF made the offer specifically after finding out they got money to buy phones and that the $1000 was solely for buying a phone. Even then, they are two separate events, but you could reason that OP should get no money in that case. You could also reason OP's sister should only get the S20FE's monetary value, otherwise there are arguments that it still wouldn't be fair.

 

The order of events is not clear to me from this thread, unless I missed it. What about this:

BGF: "B, you could have my old phone."
B: "Thanks, but I want an iOS device."

BGF: "A, you could have my old phone, your sister didn't want it."
A: "Sure, I take the phone."
GP: "A and B, Here are $1000 for both of you to get new phones."

 

That's a very different story, especially when you factor in the above extension that the money is apparently not only tied to a phone.

[Nior2008]

11 minutes ago, tikker said:

The consequence of refusing a gift, finding out that that does not automatically entitle you to another/better one. We have one insight in her reasoning:

 

Sure there are reasons why you may prefer a certain ecosystem, but those reasons do not entitle you to a bigger share of a different offer, or a different offer at all after refusing another one because it doesn't meet your preferences or requirements.

 

And they have received equal value: an agreed upon $500 each of a $1000 combined offer. Subtracting the S20FE's value is reasoning from the viewpoint of equal oucome, which is one way to do it. I would say it's also fair to reason from an equal starting point: both get $500 to spend.

 

With OP's new clarification of

it seems to have been a more general gift not only for phones

Still two events, unless you assume that BGF made the offer specifically after finding out they got money to buy phones and that the $1000 was solely for buying a phone. Even then, they are two separate events, but you could reason that OP should get no money in that case. You could also reason OP's sister should only get the S20FE's monetary value, otherwise there are arguments that it still wouldn't be fair.

 

The order of events is not clear to me from this thread, unless I missed it. What about this:

BGF: "B, you could have my old phone."
B: "Thanks, but I want an iOS device."

BGF: "A, you could have my old phone, your sister didn't want it."
A: "Sure, I take the phone."
GP: "A and B, Here are $1000 for both of you to get new phones."

 

That's a very different story, especially when you factor in the above extension that the money is apparently not only tied to a phone.

Erm guys some of your words are too difficult for me to understand please remember I'm only 14 thanks. 

[Fragment323]

16 hours ago, Nior2008 said:

Graps gave me the $1000 and said get new phones each if you need to. I did tell gramps Sarah gave me the S20FE. He did say *and I quote* "then do whatever you want but don't waste it on pokemon cards " 

It's rather simple then.
Keep the full 1000 Just kidding.

 

In my opinion, this should be 50/50 (or a bit around that, like 560 dollar phone and 440 dollar phone would be still OK - EDIT: it does not need to be phone, it was jsut easier to use "in case of  buiyng new phones" for value comparision... in my head atleast ), but siblings are unreasonable sometimes (two younger brothers, yaaaaaay).
People who say that price of second-hand samsung should be added to this 1000 budget are out of their mind and you gramps quote proves that its two separate things.
If you want to try to make relationship with your sister better, you can give her 600 for exmaple, but I wouldnt go too far.

BUT, as the little dipshit that I am, I would make her reason her way to the extra 100 (and try to make her see that her request is unfair and her reasoning is flawed).
For example:
Why do you think, that you should get 1000 dollars for phone, while I get 0?
Why do you think, that you need 1000 dollar phone?
What can 1000 dollar phone do, and 500 dollar cannot do, that is absolutely necessary for you?

Do you think that your solution is equally far to both of us? Why?

Or make her do your chores for the extra 100, since at this point it is coming out of your pocket.
 

You can just say plain NO, but you will share household for some years to come, so you both should learn to be a bit flexible and try not to sabotage your relationship over efing phones. Wish me and my brothers were able to learn that back in the day.

 

But remember, You can assess this situation the best, since we do not have more info than you have provided.
Do not let internet people make your decisions for you.

[Bitter]

4 hours ago, Nior2008 said:

Erm guys some of your words are too difficult for me to understand please remember I'm only 14 thanks. 

Don't worry about it, you've just got all the old men riled up and tilting at windmills.

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, Nior2008 said:

Erm guys some of your words are too difficult for me to understand please remember I'm only 14 thanks. 

If there are specific words you don't understand, you should quote them and ask. There's nothing to be ashamed about not knowing what certain words mean, but that ignorance is only justified if you strive to learn from it.

[cmndr]

You can buy used iPhones for under $500. Heck I used an iPhone XR I got on promo from 2019-2022. I upgraded to my girlfriend's old Pixel 5 which I paid $200 for. I make several hundred thousand dollars a year. 



She wants something shiny and new. 
You not tossing money at something flashy isn't a good reason for her to want something flashier than she would've gotten otherwise. 

[Nior2008]

57 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

If there are specific words you don't understand, you should quote them and ask. There's nothing to be ashamed about not knowing what certain words mean, but that ignorance is only justified if you strive to learn from it.

K, thanks. 

[WildDagwood]

Some of the responses here are a little intense. Unless you're really hard up for money (which the OP and sis aren't), no one should be arguing this much over what's at stake.

 

Quit trying to break things down into law arguments and hypothetical scenarios that mean nothing. If this is how you approach your family on insignificant matters, you have some shit to work on personally.

 

@Nior2008 just talk to your sister and lay out your point view. Provided one or both of you aren't greed mongers, you'll come to something agreeable for both.

 

 

[Nior2008]

3 hours ago, WildDagwood said:

Some of the responses here are a little intense. Unless you're really hard up for money (which the OP and sis aren't), no one should be arguing this much over what's at stake.

 

Quit trying to break things down into law arguments and hypothetical scenarios that mean nothing. If this is how you approach your family on insignificant matters, you have some shit to work on personally.

 

@Nior2008 just talk to your sister and lay out your point view. Provided one or both of you aren't greed mongers, you'll come to something agreeable for both.

 

 

I tried talking with my sister but this is what she said :

Well, she said since I already have a phone from my brother's gf had given me the S20FE, I should hand over the money since I'm a kid and I don't have a 'need' and buying a Nintendo switch lite is a 'want'. 

 

Ps: what does 'hypothetical scenarios' mean? Sorry.