Quoted 4% loss but uses 28 g in place of 32 g — true outcome A dealer claims a 4% loss on price but gives only 28 g instead of 32 g per dose. What is his actual profit or loss percentage?

Introduction / Context:
In short-weight scenarios, actual cost is for less quantity than billed. Even with a quoted loss, the reduced quantity can turn the outcome into a net gain. We translate the 28 g versus 32 g situation into cost-revenue comparisons for one “claimed dose.”

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Quoted loss on price: 4% → SP per claimed 32 g = 0.96 * CP for 32 g.
• Actual delivered mass per dose = 28 g.
• Uniform cost per gram.

Concept / Approach:
Let cost per gram = c. Then CP for 32 g = 32c; quoted SP = 0.96 * 32c = 30.72c. Actual cost incurred = 28c. Profit% = (30.72c − 28c) / (28c) * 100.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Profit = 30.72c − 28c = 2.72c.Profit% = 2.72c / 28c * 100 = (2.72/28) * 100.2.72/28 = 0.097142857... ⇒ Profit% ≈ 9.7142857% = 68/7% gain.

Verification / Alternative check:
Factor form: effective multiplier = 0.96 / (28/32) = 0.96 / 0.875 = 1.097142857... ⇒ 9.7142857% gain, identical to 68/7%.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Loss options contradict factor > 1; 16 3/7% and 14 3/7% do not match the 0.96 / 0.875 ratio; 9% underestimates the exact value.

Common Pitfalls:
Applying 4% to the delivered 28 g incorrectly, or computing percentage on SP rather than on cost.

Final Answer:
68/7% gain