In article <#GY7#JwQFHA.4020@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
"Biff" <biffinpitt@comcast.net> wrote:

> You know, I was thinking after I posted that none of the replies so far
> (including mine) has accounted for the fact that the max value may be the
> last value in the range and would cause a return of #DIV/0!.

It seems that in all cases, including mine, an error would be returned.
But I think that may be okay, since it would alert the user of that fact.

> And then there's the possibility of dupe max's ......Which MIN do you want
> after which dupe MAX .....

Good question. I assumed, like everyone else, the minimum after the
first duplicate.