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 Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!

Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 350,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club

Registration gives you:

Tests

Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.

Applicant Stats

View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more

Books/Downloads

Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
14 Jan 2013, 05:56

1

This post received KUDOS

5

This post was BOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

29% (03:14) correct
71% (02:06) wrong based on 453 sessions

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increased in value by x%. Between 1985 and 1990, the portfolio increased in value by y%. Since 1990, the portfolio has decreased in value by z%. If x, y, and z are all positive integers, is the portfolio currently worth more than it was in 1980?

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
14 Jan 2013, 06:39

1

This post received KUDOS

Expert's post

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increased in value by x%. Between 1985 and 1990, the portfolio increased in value by y%. Since 1990, the portfolio has decreased in value by z%. If x, y, and z are all positive integers, is the portfolio currently worth more than it was in 1980?

Say the value of the portfolio in 1980 was $1. then:

Price in 1980 = 1; Price in 1985 = (1+\frac{x}{100}); Price in 1990 = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100}); Price in now = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100}).

(1) x + y > z. If x=1, y=100, and z=1, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.99>1 BUT if x=1, y=100, and z=90, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.1<1. Not sufficient.

(2) y − x > z. Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

the look similar, but the questions meant to be different:

The annual rent collected by a corporation from a certain building was x percent more in 1998 than in 1997 and y percent less in 1999 than in 1998. Was the annual rent collected by the corporation from the building more in 1999 than in 1997?

(1) x > y (2) xy/100 < x-y

cant we make the reasoning there the same as here, r=1 and solve similiar as above?

the look similar, but the questions meant to be different:

The annual rent collected by a corporation from a certain building was x percent more in 1998 than in 1997 and y percent less in 1999 than in 1998. Was the annual rent collected by the corporation from the building more in 1999 than in 1997?

(1) x > y (2) xy/100 < x-y

cant we make the reasoning there the same as here, r=1 and solve similiar as above?

Yes you can. But whatever value of r you pick will eventually not matter.

I will go directly to the solution here, so we can write the question as: R(1+\frac{x}{100})(1-\frac{y}{100})>R, as you see now we can safely divide by R (which is positive) and obtain (1+\frac{x}{100})(1-\frac{y}{100})>1. So you can assume R=1 at the beginning if this makes your calculus easier.

Hope it's clear _________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
02 Jun 2013, 04:14

My approach:

Simple pick-numbers.

Origin value of the investment portfolio: 100. Increase by 10% and then also by 10% = 100*1,1 = 110 110 * 1,1 = 121. Decrease by 19% ~ 20% = 1/5 = ~ 24 so the total value is below 100.

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
18 Mar 2014, 02:43

Bunuel wrote:

(1) x + y > z. If x=1, y=100, and z=1, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.99>1 BUT if x=1, y=100, and z=90, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.1<1. Not sufficient.

(2) y − x > z. Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

Bunuel: Can you please share some thought on how to come up with such numbers for plugging in.

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
30 Mar 2014, 00:00

Bunuel wrote:

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increased in value by x%. Between 1985 and 1990, the portfolio increased in value by y%. Since 1990, the portfolio has decreased in value by z%. If x, y, and z are all positive integers, is the portfolio currently worth more than it was in 1980?

Say the value of the portfolio in 1980 was $1. then:

Price in 1980 = 1; Price in 1985 = (1+\frac{x}{100}); Price in 1990 = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100}); Price in now = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100}).

(1) x + y > z. If x=1, y=100, and z=1, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.99>1 BUT if x=1, y=100, and z=90, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.1<1. Not sufficient.

(2) y − x > z. Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

Answer: E.

I just want to know how you come up with these numbers,Bunuel?Is there any rule of thumb?

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
25 Oct 2014, 03:37

Bunuel wrote:

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increased in value by x%. Between 1985 and 1990, the portfolio increased in value by y%. Since 1990, the portfolio has decreased in value by z%. If x, y, and z are all positive integers, is the portfolio currently worth more than it was in 1980?

Say the value of the portfolio in 1980 was $1. then:

Price in 1980 = 1; Price in 1985 = (1+\frac{x}{100}); Price in 1990 = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100}); Price in now = (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100}).

(1) x + y > z. If x=1, y=100, and z=1, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.99>1 BUT if x=1, y=100, and z=90, then (1+\frac{x}{100})(1+\frac{y}{100})(1-\frac{z}{100})=1.01*2*0.1<1. Not sufficient.

(2) y − x > z. Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) Consider the same cases. Not sufficient.

Answer: E.

Can you please tell how did you choose these numbers ? I mean within two minutes finding these number may be little difficult. So is there are some number which I have to always take care of. Please help !

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas [#permalink]
25 Oct 2014, 04:09

0

daviesj wrote:

Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increased in value by x%. Between 1985 and 1990, the portfolio increased in value by y%. Since 1990, the portfolio has decreased in value by z%. If x, y, and z are all positive integers, is the portfolio currently worth more than it was in 1980?

(1) x + y > z

(2) y − x > z

E.

The quickest way to do this ques is by plugging in values for x,y,and z

1) x+y > z Now looking at FS1 we can easily say that the portfolio value would easily be greater than that it was in 1980 (assuming x and y to be very large numbers and z to be really small) To make the value smaller, we need negative growth...for that x,y,and z should be as close as possible. let x=y=z=1 compound % growth in first 2 periods = 1+1+(1*1/100) = 2.01 compound % growth in 3rd period = 2.01 - 1 - .201 = .809 which is negative growth. so insufficient.

2) y-x > z Again positive growth can be show by assuming x and y to be large and z to be small for negative growth: x=1, y=100, and z=98

(1)+(2) --> same can be done here. _________________

Illegitimi non carborundum.

gmatclubot

Re: Between 1980 and 1985, Pierre’s investment portfolio increas
[#permalink]
25 Oct 2014, 04:09

hey guys, A metallurgist but currently working in a NGO and have scheduled my GMAT in December for second round .....u know. I read some but valuable blogs on this...

Today, 1st year Rotman students had a great simulation event hosted by Scotiabank, one of Canada’s best and largest banks. Attended by entire Rotman 1st year students, the...

Nope. I never learned finance ever in my life until I came to Rotman. This is why I got really frustrated when this term started because I was certain...