A recent report determined that although only three percent : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 3
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 19 Jan 2017, 20:32

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A recent report determined that although only three percent

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1603
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 245 [9] , given: 0

A recent report determined that although only three percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2003, 06:02
9
KUDOS
98
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 470
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 193 [0], given: 4

A recent report determined that although only three percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jan 2008, 10:59
171. A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their
vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were
equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed
the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed
limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly
than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of
vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the
time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state
highways not covered in the report.
_________________

-Underline your question. It takes only a few seconds!
-Search before you post.

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 295
Location: SFO Bay Area
Schools: Berkeley Haas
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2008, 20:22
I would go with A. Whats the correct answer ?

A, It explains that the drivers who have radar detector assume that there are less chances for them to be detected as they will be able to reduce their speed before getting caught and hence drive faster, under the fore mentioned assumption.
B, It doesn't make sense as its talking abt drivers who get ticketed are more likely to exceed rather than drivers who have radar detected.
C, Its a fact, it can be easily gauged from the statement : "that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their
vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were
equipped with them"...so its not an assumption.
D, Its irrelevant, we are talking about the drivers who exceed not the number of drivers who were ticketed twice.
E, Its also irrelevant as its talking about other states.

SKS
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------
When you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

Current Student
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 187
Schools: Wharton
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2008, 20:52
D?

the stem says "ticketed REGULARLY"
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 295
Location: SFO Bay Area
Schools: Berkeley Haas
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2008, 21:24
Now when I think about it...D does make sense...

Look at this link : 11-p231817?t=33790&hilit=A+recent+report+determined+that+although+only+three+percent+of+drivers+on+Maryland#p231817

SKS
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------
When you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

Director
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 879
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 772 [0], given: 33

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2008, 21:28
the conclusion states that drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are driver who do not.

Only "B" makes this assumption of "regularly".

Thus "B"
SVP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1569
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 250 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2008, 11:06
Confused between B and D. I will go with B.

Since only 3% of vehicles are equipped with Radar detectors, while 33% of ticketed vehicles are equipped with Radar detectors.
Conclusion: Drivers with vehicles equipped with radar detectors are more likely to exceed speed limit regularly.

Choice B supports the conclusion by clarifying why only 3% of vehicles might be resulting into 33% of ticketed vehicles.
Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 119
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 107 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2008, 16:36
1
KUDOS
I've seen this one before, and I believe it is an LSAT question. The answer is B. It works like this:

Conclusion: Drivers who have radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than drivers who do not.

Evidence: 3% of drivers on Maryland highways had radar detectors in their vehicles, but 33% of vehicles which got speeding tickets on Maryland highways had radar detectors.

What does the evidence prove? If 3% of the vehicles have radar detectors but those vehicles account for 33% of the tickets, then the evidence DOES prove that vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to get a ticket. Their share of the total number of tickets is greater than their share of the total number of vehicles. This makes it arithmetically inevitable that the percentage of them (again, this is the detector-equipped cars) which gets tickets is bigger than the percentage of other cars which gets tickets.

The conclusion, however, does NOT say that the vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to get a ticket. It says that they are more likely to exceed the speed limit REGULARLY. So the missing assumption is that a vehicle or driver which gets a ticket is therefore also more likely to exceed the speed limit REGULARLY. The evidence proves that these vehicles get more tickets; we need the missing assumption (choice B) to go from there to the conclusion.

The wording of the question actually allows for another, much more subtle flaw in the argument -- one which is NOT used in these answer choices. The evidence actually doesn't say that 3% of VEHICLES have radar detectors; it says that 3% of DRIVERS equip their vehicles with radar detectors. Because of this, the argument also depends on assuming that this 3% of drivers do NOT collectively own 33% or more of the vehicles on Maryland highways. If they did, then it would be possible for the proportion of all vehicles with radar detectors to be the same as, or higher than, the proportion of all tickets which go to those vehicles.
_________________

Grumpy

Kaplan Canada LSAT/GMAT/GRE teacher and tutor

Manager
Joined: 04 Dec 2008
Posts: 104
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 175 [1] , given: 2

A recent report determined that although only three percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Nov 2009, 05:22
1
KUDOS
A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.
The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.

OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
B
. What's wrong with
[Reveal] Spoiler:
D
?
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 261
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 325 [0], given: 3

### Show Tags

02 Nov 2009, 08:01
In case of an assumption ques you are looking for an equalizing statment (i.e. Assumption Statment = Conclusion Statement). Now the explanation for the OA logic:
Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit <is the same as> drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors, and
Drivers who are not ticketed <is the same as> drivers who do not equip their vehicles with radar detectors

Now if you read the option [B] you'll find that the meaning of the conclusion statement is just the same as option [B]. Hence, [B] is the best option that fits the bill and is also the OA.

Hope this helps..
Manager
Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 9

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2009, 12:25
@abhi758- Assumption is not = conclusion.
Evidence+assumption=conclusion
Manager
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 77
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 1

A recent report determined that although only three percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2010, 08:02
A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.
The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were;. ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.

Manager
Joined: 19 Feb 2009
Posts: 76
Location: chennai
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 0

Re: A recent report determined .. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2010, 02:27
A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.
The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were;. ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.

Back Ground Info: 3% vehicles ----Maryland highway drivers ---- with radar detectors
Premise : 33% vehicles -- ticked -- exceeding speed (Radar fixed )

Conclusion :
exceed speed limit( radar fixed) > exceed speed limit ( Radar not fixed )

My Ans - B)
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 612 [0], given: 10

A recent report determined that although only three percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jul 2010, 11:27
A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.
The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were;. ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.

Can someone please explain why C is incorrect?
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 481
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2010, 05:32
We're told that although only 3 percent of people have radar detectors, 33 percent of people ticketed for speeding have them. Based on this, the author concludes that those with radar detectors are more likely to speed.

What if drivers who are not ticketed for speeding, are more likely to speed than drivers who are ticketed for speeding. It's possible that those people who are speeding, but not ticketed for speeding, would not own radar detectors. If that were the case, then the conclusion stating that those who own radar detectors are more likely to speed is no longer valid.

So, for the conclusion to be valid, it must be true that drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed, choice B.
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 612 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2010, 05:43
onedayill wrote:
We're told that although only 3 percent of people have radar detectors, 33 percent of people ticketed for speeding have them. Based on this, the author concludes that those with radar detectors are more likely to speed.

What if drivers who are not ticketed for speeding, are more likely to speed than drivers who are ticketed for speeding. It's possible that those people who are speeding, but not ticketed for speeding, would not own radar detectors. If that were the case, then the conclusion stating that those who own radar detectors are more likely to speed is no longer valid.

So, for the conclusion to be valid, it must be true that drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed, choice B.

I know why B is correct. Iam still trying to figure out why C is incorrect. Is C incorrect because the data in C is already provided in the premises?
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 481
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2010, 06:02
goalsnr wrote:
onedayill wrote:
We're told that although only 3 percent of people have radar detectors, 33 percent of people ticketed for speeding have them. Based on this, the author concludes that those with radar detectors are more likely to speed.

What if drivers who are not ticketed for speeding, are more likely to speed than drivers who are ticketed for speeding. It's possible that those people who are speeding, but not ticketed for speeding, would not own radar detectors. If that were the case, then the conclusion stating that those who own radar detectors are more likely to speed is no longer valid.

So, for the conclusion to be valid, it must be true that drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed, choice B.

I know why B is correct. Iam still trying to figure out why C is incorrect. Is C incorrect because the data in C is already provided in the premises?

#3 is irrelevant to the argument.
There is no mention of drivers receiving multiple tickets in the passage, and, furthermore, multiple tickets to the same driver would have no bearing at all on the study anyway (because the study examined the different vehicles ticketed, without regard to the # of tickets for each).
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 612 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2010, 09:44
In this case your logic is flawed. As per the OG explanation,answer B is correct because the argument brings out a generalization and attributes it to the behaviour of the drivers. The jist of the argument is the drivers who use radar detectors get ticketed more often because they are regular offenders.
Because of this explanation Iam kind of confused why C doesn't make a correct answer.

onedayill wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
onedayill wrote:
We're told that although only 3 percent of people have radar detectors, 33 percent of people ticketed for speeding have them. Based on this, the author concludes that those with radar detectors are more likely to speed.

What if drivers who are not ticketed for speeding, are more likely to speed than drivers who are ticketed for speeding. It's possible that those people who are speeding, but not ticketed for speeding, would not own radar detectors. If that were the case, then the conclusion stating that those who own radar detectors are more likely to speed is no longer valid.

So, for the conclusion to be valid, it must be true that drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed, choice B.

I know why B is correct. Iam still trying to figure out why C is incorrect. Is C incorrect because the data in C is already provided in the premises?

#3 is irrelevant to the argument.
There is no mention of drivers receiving multiple tickets in the passage, and, furthermore, multiple tickets to the same driver would have no bearing at all on the study anyway (because the study examined the different vehicles ticketed, without regard to the # of tickets for each).
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 354
Location: San Francisco
Followers: 497

Kudos [?]: 1314 [17] , given: 11

Re: A recent report determined .. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2010, 11:55
17
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hey All,

I can explain that difference! Let's take this from the top.

A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

Conclusion: Driver with radar exceed the speed limit more than those with no radar.
Premise: 3% of drivers have radar. 33% of ticketed vehicles have them.
Assumption: Something else about the radar doesn't make you more likely to get ticketed. Speed = tickets.

The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
PROBLEM: This is the opposite of what we want. The people with radar are clearly getting tickets MORE often than those who do not.

(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
ANSWER: This is dangerous, because most people ASSUME this already (if you get tickets more, it's because you're speeding more). But remember this is the GMAT, we cannot assume this. We can't jump from "more tickets" to "more speeding", as much as our logic nodes may want it.

(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
PROBLEM: We don't need to assume this to make our conclusion. Try negating it, and seeing if that destroys the conclusion (this is a way to test correct assumptions). "The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was NOT greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors." So what? It could still be true that people with radar are speeding more.

(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
PROBLEM: Even if this might work, it's the OPPOSITE of what we'd want. We'd want to assume that these people were only ticketed ONCE, because if the same person was ticketed multiple times, he might only be one person, in which case the conclusion doesn't work. But the negation of this is: "Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were NOT ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report." That HELPS the argument, see? Now we can possibly infer that there are MORE PEOPLE with radar speeding, because there are no duplicates.

(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.
PROBLEM: Who cares about stuff outside of Maryland?

Hope that helps!

-t
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Manager
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 125
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 17

Re: A recent report determined .. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 06:21
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

I can explain that difference! Let's take this from the top.

A recent report determined that although only three percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, thirty-three percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

Conclusion: Driver with radar exceed the speed limit more than those with no radar.
Premise: 3% of drivers have radar. 33% of ticketed vehicles have them.
Assumption: Something else about the radar doesn't make you more likely to get ticketed. Speed = tickets.

The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
PROBLEM: This is the opposite of what we want. The people with radar are clearly getting tickets MORE often than those who do not.

(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
ANSWER: This is dangerous, because most people ASSUME this already (if you get tickets more, it's because you're speeding more). But remember this is the GMAT, we cannot assume this. We can't jump from "more tickets" to "more speeding", as much as our logic nodes may want it.

(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
PROBLEM: We don't need to assume this to make our conclusion. Try negating it, and seeing if that destroys the conclusion (this is a way to test correct assumptions). "The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was NOT greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors." So what? It could still be true that people with radar are speeding more.

(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
PROBLEM: Even if this might work, it's the OPPOSITE of what we'd want. We'd want to assume that these people were only ticketed ONCE, because if the same person was ticketed multiple times, he might only be one person, in which case the conclusion doesn't work. But the negation of this is: "Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were NOT ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report." That HELPS the argument, see? Now we can possibly infer that there are MORE PEOPLE with radar speeding, because there are no duplicates.

(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.
PROBLEM: Who cares about stuff outside of Maryland?

Hope that helps!

-t

Hi I don't understand how is this conclusion stated, true logically???

Back Ground Info: 3% vehicles ----Maryland highway drivers ---- with radar detectors
Premise : 33% vehicles -- ticked -- exceeding speed (Radar fixed )

Conclusion :
exceed speed limit( radar fixed) > exceed speed limit ( Radar not fixed )

what i feel is that if 33% vehicles -- ticked -- exceeding speed (Radar fixed ) that means that other 77 % vehicles---ticketed---exceeding speed(radar not fixed) should be true... which is opposite of the conclusion...
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 354
Location: San Francisco
Followers: 497

Kudos [?]: 1314 [2] , given: 11

Re: A recent report determined .. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 10:08
2
KUDOS
Did my best, but please don't PM me anymore, as I'm taking a break from the forums.

-t
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Re: A recent report determined ..   [#permalink] 23 Sep 2010, 10:08

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7    Next  [ 129 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A recent report determined that although only three percent 0 13 Jan 2013, 11:54
A recent report determined that although only three percent 0 28 May 2012, 02:58
A recent report determined that although only three percent 0 09 Feb 2013, 00:35
A recent report determined that although only three percent 0 03 Nov 2009, 12:25
A recent report determined that although only three percent 0 13 Dec 2008, 16:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by