GiveItaGo

Hi Everyone, I'd like to thank everyone on this forum especially Erin for setting it up.. I gave a test last week and scored 720 (q48, v40), was quite relieved to have it over an done with .. although i think i should have done better in verbal. I think in the last ocuple of weeks i focused to hard on the quant because i was more scared of that and i think my verbal suffered ... anyways its always easier in retrospect... I've really glad to have it over with.. I'm from australia and don't know anyone giving the gmat around me so it was nice to have this forum , felt like i had a study group around me and other people who were going through same pain... Cheers! [clap]

1)Don't really understand what the question is asking. 2) a) aba=a this holds true if a=0 or ab=1 therefore not sufficient. c) bab = b this holds true if b=0 or ab=1 therefore not suffiencient. together they are not suffient either as a= and b=0 satifies both and a=1 and b=1 satisfies both. 3) I agree with E . As we need to have the probability of B to work that out. 4) Think its D. Although if you want to get really nit picky then its A as B does not state which monday he arrived on . He might have arrived a week late. 5) How does a satisfy it. if m=7 and n=10 then the greatest common divisor is 1 however if n=14 then it is 7. I think the answer to this is C. as the grestest common divisor will be 1 in this case.

Thanks for that solution GMAT-HELP.. i wouldn't have seen it otherwise.

Yeah i agree it has to be A.

I think its E. Vingmat, I understand the statement 1 to be : x= (y^k)*p . Because from your equation (k*y)^2 it implies that y goes into x twice x= k*y *k*y, however the question states that it can go many times. Not sure though. (i'm not that good with equations) Anyways plugging some numbers in may help. x=36, y=6 and z=12 ; this does not yeild an integer. x=36 y=6 and z=6 ; This does yeild an integer. so my guess it E.

4) We already know that the egg that is picked is defective. So we are only concerned with the defective eggs , 4 brown defectives and 6 white defectives. Thus the probability that the defective egg is brown = brown defectives/total defectives = 4/10 =2/5

Are we expected to know these formulas or is there an easier way of doing this.. or better still is a question like this not likely to come up.

Another way would be .. find the lowest common multiple of 4,6 and 8. This will equal the length of one of the three equal parts. 24 can be divided by 4,6,8. Total length of original will be 24*3 =72.

First you have to work out how much he earns per hour for overtime. overtime rate = $5.60 *1.5 = $8.4 So for every overtime hour he gets $8.40. He worked 8 hours overtime, so in total he would get $8.40 * 8 = $67.20 for his overtime hours.

Yep good idea. Thanks for that suggestion. Also typo in my solution. x=L*W x=(x-6)/2 x=18 should be x=L*W x=(x-6)/2 * 3 x=18

You can also answer this by back solving from the choices. A) if 18 were rented out. then 2 remained on the lot (20-18) and 9 were returned (18*50%). So the total trucks at the lot = remaining + returned = 2+9 =11 . So a can't be the answer. B) similary for. remaining + returned = 4+8 = 12. Thus B is the answer.

great explanations.. thanks for your efforts

Hi Chimney This is how I solved the two questions above. 1) 10^1 =100 has 2 digits 10^2 =1000 has 3 digits 10^3 =10000 has 4 digits So the pattern is that 10^n has (n+1) digits. Therefore 10^100 has (100+1) digits.Thus the answer is 101. 2) We know the area is x sq feet. Strip had length x before it was fitted around the table. The width is 3. Let the length of the table be L and width be W (which we know is 3). length of strip = 2L +2W (as the strip was put around the perimeter of the rectangle) therefore x=2L+2W x=2L +2(3) x=2L + 6 L = (x-6)/2 now we know that the area of the table is x. x=L*W x=(x-6)/2 x=18 We still need to get the length L=(18-6)/2 . answer : length is 6.

Hi David, I have a question with regards to addmission timings.. I'm planning to give my test in the middle of september (originally planned for early august .. but some major stuff has come in at work and i'm unable to give it at that date..) is this enough time to prepare for the 2nd round of addmissions. Thanks Mita

Does anyone know how close the 800Score math tests are to the real GMAT with regards to difficulty. would appreciate some feedback as i'm about to take my GMAT soon and i'm a bit worried about the Quant section

The opinion that technology separates people more than it serves to bring them together is one that is causing much debate. The issue is of even greater importance at this point in time as technology has become a crucial part of our everyday functions. The strongest supporters of the above claim argue that technology has provided instruments that have facilitated separation, however in saying so they overlook the ways in which technology has brought people closer together. In this essay I will put forward arguments that illustrate how technology has brought people together. Firstly, lets consider how technology has brought people closer together by providing better means of communications. The telephone, internet, mobile phone and other modern telecommunications wonders are all important delvelopements that have allowed people to communicate with each other. This access to different and convienient modes of communcating has brought a feeling of closeness. As we head towards the future further technological advancements such as video conferencing will further facilitate bringing people closer together. Additionally, technology has allowed those people to interact with each of that could not have with technology, thus reducing their feeling of alienation. Take for example the residents of a rural village in India. Without technological advancements this group of people were separated and alienated from the rest of world. However with advances in transporation and communication this village can now feel closer to the rest of its global neighbours. In this case technology has facilitated the connecting various separated and isolated people. Further, looking from the perspective of social alienation and separation, that is when various people in a society feel that they are separated from society because of their financial status, or lack of oppurtunity. Consider a family living below the poverty line, its members so not have access to resources or opportunites and this often leads to a feeling of being alienated. Technology allows us to take steps to reduce this social separatness and alienation by providing better opportunities, by providing cheaper access to information, greater acecss to opportunities. Without technology people needed to have money to buy expensive Encyclopedias to access valuable information, however the internet now allows acces to information at a fraction of the cost. Therefore, it can be seen from the above examples that technology has played a powerful role in bringing people together socially, economically and in spirit. Although technology may allow ways to work in isolation it will continue to provides ways in which alienation and the feeling of separatness is further reduced.

I have my GMAT in less that three weeks, please give me some feedback about writing. Based on the evidence provided, the conclusion that a switch from newspaper advertisements to radio advertisements will boost sales and profits of the shop is not entirely convincing as it overlooks certain crucial assumptions. First, the argument assumes that and increase in foot traffic at Disc Depot has actually led to an increase in business. It is likely that there are more people visiting the shop due to the radio add however these people are not actually purchasing merchandise. This scenario is possible, consider the following example. The radio add states that a celebrity will be visiting the store or that there is a free gift for all that walk through the front gates. Such advertising methods might lead to a large increase in foot traffic, however may not realistically protray business growth. Also, the arugment assumes that Carlo's Clothing is not performing well due to lack of advertising. Surely there may be many other explanations as to why a business is facing stagnant growth. Carlo's clothing may have more competitors located closely, it may not be keeping up with the day's fashion, it may just have unmotivated sales people. The list of possible reasons for stagnant growth is long and thus it cannot be assumed that a lack of advertising is the cause for its low growth levels. In addition, the argument assumes that Disc Depots owners are able to retire as a result of the large sums they have earned from the increase in business. Instead the owners retirement status may be a result of many years of earning and have no connection with the suddent increase in the foot traffic at the Disc Depot. It is possible that the owners of the shop have been working for many years and have slowly collected funds to retire. Moreover, the most serious assumption in the argument above is that radio advertising is more effective that newspaper advertising. Even if the above three assumptions are to be proved this assumption will serve as a strong flaw in the argument. For a music store like Disc Depot the radio may prove as a strong medium for advertising as the radio also deals with the provision of music. Radio listeners are interested in music and thus a possible customer base for a music store, thus the add reaches the target audience and may well be effective.However this may not be the cause for all businesses. For example, if the shop in question is selling business suites its target audience maybe the busy corporate. This group of people may read the newspaper more frequently than listen to the radio. Thus a switch from newspaper advertisements to radio advertisements may prove to be of little use. Consequently, the argument is not completly sound. The evidence does little to support the conclusion that a switching to radio advertising will boost sales and profits for a business. Finally, the argument could be made more convincing by explicity stating that there has been an increase in sales and profits, that Carlo's company is performing poorly due to a lack of radio advertising as all other factors are equal to Disc Depot, that the owners have made their retirement plans after the increase in profits caused by the radio adds and that the shop in question has a similar target audience to Disc Depot. :confused:

Well since i have not contributed to the record books (yet) .. let this be my first attempt... p.s Koalas sleep for about 20 hours a day (maybe in my next life i will live in a gum tree)

This is my attempt at answering this question. Any feed back would be appreciated. ------------ The argument that developers should pay for improving services in a city rather than raising funds through increased taxes of residents, is not logically convincing. This argument ignores some critical assumptions in its reasoning. Firstly the argument assumes that as new developments are made in the city the number of tax payers will remain the same. This is usually not the case as most new developments lead to an increase in population which then leads to an increase in the need to service. This increase in population means that there is a larger tax base and that more money can be collected without having to increase the taxes that residents pay. Additionally the argument assumes that all developments increase the demand for services, however this is not always the case. Take the case of high rise apartment blocks. Although this type of development might increase costs for sewage and electricity it also saves the city from having to build large transportation networks which might be needed if the city’s residents are living more sparsely. Thus developments can also bring about cost savings for a city’s service demands. Similarly the argument also assumes that these development projects can be avoided that is these projects are not necessary for the city’s growth. If some of these projects were not carried out by the private sector in this case the developers the city would need to use tax payer money to fund them. Take for residential buildings. As the population increases people need to be housed. If developers handle these projects in a profit making manner it further reduces the burden on services that the city needs to provide, in this case housing for people. Thus the premise that increase in demand arises from developers is not entirely true as increase in demand may be due to other factors such as population. Furthermore the argument assumes that developers do not pay taxes. For example many developers need to pay building taxes, rates and stamp duties. This money is put towards servicing the improvement and expansion of infrastructure for the city. In this way the burden is shared between the developers and the people of the city. Hence the argument is not completely sound. The evidence in support of the conclusion does little to prove the conclusion that developers should bare the full burden of the increase in service costs since it does not address the assumptions stated above. Consequently the might be strengthened by stating that the new developments will have a result of a net increase in cost to the city, that these cost will can not be serviced by the increase in tax base, that these development projects could be avoided and that developers are not paying some form of tax that contributes to the development of the city’s services.

I have just started Practice for the AWA. Would appreciate feeback on my response. Thanks. The issue of government regulations against ‘suspected’ health hazards is a controversial one. On the one hand it can be argued that the public should be safeguarded against any hazards that are questionable or in doubt. Conversely it can be argues especially by those in industry that such regulations are unjust and can create a negative image of the product/service in the marketplace. However I believe that such regulations are essential for safeguarding the long term good of the larger public. Let us begin by looking back at various examples from history. Some of the then suspected hazards that were yet to be proven harmful were allowed into environment, these created irreversible damage, a well known example being passive smoking. Although it had been suspected for years that passive smoking was causing damage to the general public, it could not be completely proven until a significant time frame had passed. If in this case the government had taken a stance based on early suspicions and regulated against smoking in public areas it would have saved many lives. The point being that history has enough examples of cases where the suspected hazards turned out to be dangerous however could not be proven until the damage had been done. More importantly it has to be understood that the impact of some hazards is impossible to evaluate during a certain time period. The impact might be of slow and long term damage which may take scientists years of data collection to prove. The example of tobacco smoking is one that illustrates this. The damage for tobacco smoking takes many decades to show up as various forms of cancer. This time lag is the duration under which a hazard can be considered ‘suspect’. It is the governments’ duty to protect and warn the public against such suspect hazards. Another important point is that of freedom of information. If governments know of such suspect hazards that have the potential to be damaging they must bring these forward. Regulations to give consumers warnings and limit supply work as communication to the larger public that the product/service has a potential to be hazardous. Even if at that point these suspect hazards are not completely eliminated, regulations will help manage potential damage. Finally it can also be argued that the companies selling these suspect products and services will invest in conclusively proving that they are harmless. There will be an incentive to have a clean and safe product, as it will not have to be subject to these regulations. This will help weed out companies that will compromise the general good of the public for short term gain. For the reasons above I believe that government regulations against suspect hazards are justified.