Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 20 Apr 2014, 23:08

Close

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
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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 118
Followers: 1

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

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink] New post 12 Apr 2006, 02:55
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporation’s profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporation’s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.

On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?

(A) The increase in the pharmaceutical division’s contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.
(B) In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporation’s profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.
(C) The percentage of the corporation’s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division’s performance had not improved.
(D) The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.
(E) The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

If you pick an answer, please explain why you picked it.
Director
Director
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 663
Location: London
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 12 Apr 2006, 02:59
I am going with C.
Maybe the pharma division didnt do any better. But the poor performance of the chemical division raised the performance percentage of the pharma division.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 225
Location: Milwaukee,WI
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 12 Apr 2006, 05:56
C for me too . since chemical division's profit went down so as a result the profit percentage of pharma went up ( where in reality the overall profile of pharma division might have been the same ) the percentage increase/decrease is always relative not absolute .
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 336
Location: London
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 12 Apr 2006, 08:37
Agree with C.


remgeo wrote:
I am going with C.
Maybe the pharma division didnt do any better. But the poor performance of the chemical division raised the performance percentage of the pharma division.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 10
Location: Zurich
Followers: 0

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

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 15 Apr 2006, 13:26
Yes, C

SunShine wrote:
Agree with C.


remgeo wrote:
I am going with C.
Maybe the pharma division didnt do any better. But the poor performance of the chemical division raised the performance percentage of the pharma division.
  [#permalink] 15 Apr 2006, 13:26
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
New posts Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for chunjuwu 1 11 Dec 2004, 18:06
Popular new posts 1 Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for nocilis 10 16 Feb 2005, 19:32
New posts Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for nakib77 7 27 Oct 2005, 13:17
New posts Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for prude_sb 4 25 Apr 2006, 18:39
Popular new posts 5 Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for noboru 27 23 Aug 2009, 10:13
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.