Suppliers 'A' and 'B' provided the following numbers of products for the luxury hamper market:
Product | 'A' | 'B' |
---|---|---|
Beluga Caviar | 5248 | 640 |
Christmas Cake | 1312 | 1888 |
Gammon Joint | 2624 | 3776 |
Vintage Port | 5760 | 3776 |
Champagne Truffles | 3936 | 5664 |
Although the suppliers try very hard to ship their goods in perfect condition, there is inevitably some spoilage - i.e. products gone bad.
The suppliers compare their performance using two types of statistic:
To their surprise, the suppliers found that each of the five per-product spoilage rates was worse (higher) for 'B' than for 'A' by the same factor (ratio of spoilage rates), m>1; and yet, paradoxically, the overall spoilage rate was worse for 'A' than for 'B', also by a factor of m.
There are thirty-five m>1 for which this surprising result could have occurred, the smallest of which is 1476/1475.
What's the largest possible value of m?
Give your answer as a fraction reduced to its lowest terms, in the form u/v.