Jerry,
You're responding to my post, ... BUT ... quoting statements made by DAVE,
*not me*!
I *misunderstood* your statement:
<"My post resolves that.">
To mean that your formula resolved the mt cell issue *in the context* of the
OP.
I now understand you to mean that it *only* resolves averaging across a
range, and not allowing mt cells to be included in the average calculation.
You must admit, that this does *exactly* the same thing:
=AVERAGE(A1:A10)
And is much more simpler and concise.
However, you may say that you were addressing my statement about DAVE'S
formulas not working when mt cells were in the range.
BUT ... DAVE'S formulas were *aimed* at answering the OP's request, as was
my originally posted suggestion, 4 minutes after DAVE'S original post, and 2
minutes before his addendum post.
So, everything revolved around the concept of averaging positive and
negative numbers as if all numbers were positive.
I might have introduced the mt cell variable, but still *within* the
"positive - negative" hypothesis.
So when you posted a "resolving" formula in response to my comment about
DAVE'S formula, I'm sure you can understand my conviction that your intent
was to suggest something that was pertinent to the thread (OP).
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, but I'm sure you can easily appreciate
the rationale behind it's occurrence.