|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 04 Jul 2006
Posts: 1278
Location: Madrid
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
68
[0], given: 0
|
Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them [#permalink]
 31 Jul 2007, 10:16
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them yesterday. If the selling price of lot B was twice that of lot A, did Lana make a profit on the sale of these two lots?
(1) Lana sold lot A for 20% more than its purchase price.
(2) Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 919
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
28
[0], given: 0
|
Re: DS: Lana's Lots [#permalink]
31 Jul 2007, 10:42
kevincan wrote: Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them yesterday. If the selling price of lot B was twice that of lot A, did Lana make a profit on the sale of these two lots?
(1) Lana sold lot A for 20% more than its purchase price.
(2) Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price.
C:
1: we do not know about the purchase price of B. nsf.
2: we do not know about the purchase price of A. nsf.
1&2: we can sayt hat Lana made progit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 129
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I would say E.
If lot B sold for exactly 90% of its purchase price, with the information from both statements, Lana took a loss. But we are told it sold for more than 90% of price, so it could be a profit depending on how much more than 90%. I plugged in a couple values and at 90% it's a loss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 919
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
28
[0], given: 0
|
Re: DS: Lana's Lots [#permalink]
31 Jul 2007, 18:12
Thanks "Robin in NC". i am sure you got it.
I sleeped on 90%, which i assumed as 190%, in B. with 90%, it is perfectly make sense to go with E.
Himalayan wrote: kevincan wrote: Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them yesterday. If the selling price of lot B was twice that of lot A, did Lana make a profit on the sale of these two lots?
(1) Lana sold lot A for 20% more than its purchase price.
(2) Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price. C: 1: we do not know about the purchase price of B. nsf. 2: we do not know about the purchase price of A. nsf. 1&2: we can sayt hat Lana made progit. |
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 1
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Isn't the question just concerned about answer to the below question:
Did lana make a profit?
(A) and (B) together enable us to answer the question. The answer should be (C).
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
Let selling price of B be B and selling price of A be A
B = 2A
St1:
A = 1.2a. Although we know B = 2A, but we don't know if the purchase price of B is much higher than 2A. Insufficient.
St2:
B > 0.9b. We do not know if she sold A at a great profit though. Insufficient.
using st1 and st2:
If a = 10, then A = 12, and B = 24. 24> 0.9b--> 26>b. If b is 25.9, then overall profit = 0.1. Overall, Lana should make a profit.
Ans C
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3439
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Followers: 11
Kudos [?]:
134
[0], given: 2
|
OK at first I thought it was E...but now I am sure its E...
here is say A=selling Price of PropertyA, B=selling Price of Property B
a=purchase price of Property A, b=purchase price of Property B.
B=2A.
1) A=1.2a
insuff
2) B>0.9b
insuff
together...lets see
suppose a=10 ; A=12 therefore B=24
ok lets look at worse case scenario she sells for 0.900001b
so if 0.9b=24 then b=25.9999
net loss from b=26.666-24.00=2.66
profit from property A is 2...
2-2.66=0.66 loss...
however if she sells for higher than 90% then she could potentially make a profit on both..all she needs to sell is the property for 91% of b...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 129
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I still think it's E.
We know that if she sold the second property for 90% it's a loss, and even if at 91% it's a profit, we don't know that she sold it for 91%. All we know is she sold it for more than 90% - it could be 90.0001%. So we can't know if it was a profit or a loss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
my answer is C. use the method similar to fresinha12's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 586
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
66
[0], given: 0
|
I think we are getting confused with the varbage of statement 2.
"Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price."
Depends on how you interpret it .
If you interpret
Lana made 90% profit on purchased price : answer is C
and
If you interpret
Lana made more than 90% profit on purchased priced : answer is E .
Here we know Lana made more than 90% of its purchases price and that could be 91 92...anything . So answer has to be E.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 586
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
66
[0], given: 0
|
I think we had enough of discussion . OA Please  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 919
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
28
[0], given: 0
|
kevincan wrote: Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them yesterday. If the selling price of lot B was twice that of lot A, did Lana make a profit on the sale of these two lots?
(1) Lana sold lot A for 20% more than its purchase price.
(2) Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price. ashkrs wrote: I think we had enough of discussion . OA Please Let me clearify myself:
CP (A) = a
SP (A) = 1.2a
SP (B) = 2.4a
CP(B) = 2.4a/.9 = 8a/3
so the profit (losss) = SP - CP
= (1.2a + 2.4a) - (a + 8a/3)
= 3.6a - 11a/3
= (10.8a - 11a)/3
= - 0.2a/3
if we consider SP (B) as 92.31% of its CP, then there would be no loss no gain.
if SP (B) is > 92.31% of its purchase price, the profit is +ve. so the statements are insufficient and its E.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 04 Jul 2006
Posts: 1278
Location: Madrid
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
68
[0], given: 0
|
Re: DS: Lana's Lots [#permalink]
02 Aug 2007, 00:49
kevincan wrote: Lana bought two lots last year and sold both of them yesterday. If the selling price of lot B was twice that of lot A, did Lana make a profit on the sale of these two lots?
(1) Lana sold lot A for 20% more than its purchase price.
(2) Lana sold lot B for more than 90% of its purchase price.
Suppose the selling price of A was x. Then the selling price of B was 2x and the question can be rephrased as follows: Is the sum of the purchase prices of A and B less than 3x?
Neither is sufficient by itself: (1) says the purchase price of A is 5x/6, (2) says that the purchase price of B is less than 20x/9.
Together, (1) and (2) tell us that the sum of the purchase prices is less than 5x/6 + 20x/9 = 15x/18 + 40x/18 =55x/18 > 3x.
Thus Lana may or may not have made a profit.
OA=E
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I should go back to basic reading lessons 
I completely missed 'for more than' in the second sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
close
