Talk:Money Bin

message: It seems to me that a "cubic acre" would obviously be a volume equivalent to that of a cube comprising square faces of an acre each.  Powers T 19:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the way I've always viewed it as well.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still technically wrong. The correct term for that would be something like cubed acre, although that's pushing it. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 20:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't "cubic acre" be more correct?  After all, we use the term "cubic inches" and "cubic feet", so it stands to reason... SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As the article states, an acre is a measure of area whilst inches and feet are measures of length. A cube is made up of edges of a certain length, e.g. a cubic inch would have edges an inch long. As an acre is area and not length, it cannot be cubed without going into more than 3 dimensions. Unless there's a reliable source saying that cubic acre means it's just a cube made of acre sized squares, I think the article should continue to state it's open to interpretation. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 00:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize the usage is non-standard, and it's likely Barks didn't intend anything either way.  I was just commenting.  For interest, here's a post to a listserv listing several different media and legislative uses of the term.  Here is another listserv post that reprints several letters to the editor of the Uncle Scrooge comics originally printed in those comics as responses to the three cubic acres issue.  One letter raises the possibility that a cubic acre is a cube with a total surface area of one acre (rather than each face being one acre), so that proves that the measure is ambiguous.  =)  Powers T 12:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I assumed 3 cubic acres would mean the square root of an acre all together cubed 999deg (talk) 15:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "cubic acre" 

message: That was my interpretation too - a cube with each face having an area of 1 acre.  For what it's worth, this puts Scrooge's fortune at 5 thousand billion billion dollars.
Jjsavage 19:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cubic acre 

message: I used to watch the show Ducktales a lot. I clearly remember the money volume raising. As such, Scrooge could no long dive into it, it was -at- the level of the diving platform. If this could be confirmed, it should be added in. Also, I dimly remember an episode where his entire fortune went careening through the sewer system in one big clump. Very odd...Lots42 (talk) 17:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ducktales 

message: Of the three of Scrooge's enemies listed, only the Beagle Boys actually want his money. Flintheart Glomgold (and in the European stories, John Rockerduck) only want to witness his downfall so they can become the richest person in the world, and Magica De Spell only wants his Number One Dime, which she believes is a gateway to unlimited wealth. The paragraph should be fixed so that it doesn't mention that they're all after his money, but I can't come up with a way to say it in one sentence. JIP | Talk 20:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed with you on Flintheart Glomgold.  Glomgold is himself independently wealthy, and just wants to be wealthier than Scrooge.  However, Magica has gone after the Money Bin on occasion when the dime is inside.  I remember an episode of DuckTales where she gets Gladstone Gander to steal the dime from inside the Money Bin.  I've tweaked that passage to remove Glomgold from the mix, but left Magica in, though I also clarified a bit more.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scrooge's enemies