I agree with Hugo; I thought this was a good question.

Being before my second morning cuppa, I misread nvarchar, so neglected to factor unicode into my calculations, and so got the question "right". However, I most certainly didn't think about the other "overhead" costs, and so I've learnt something new. Is it an important something? Probably not, given the fact that my table size estimates are based on far more approximate figures anyway (Microsoft don't have a 10% "For Luck" overhead included in their calculations ;)), but it's added to my understanding which I don't think can ever be a waste.

So thank you, Alok, for a good question, and commiserations that your answer choices were off the mark.

And a reminder to everyone having a moan that Steve did pose the far bigger challenge (if you're up for it) that you can submit QOTDs of your own. Basically, if you think you can do better, prove it.