Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum
Learn more about the recent changes... close

It is currently 23 May 2013, 18:02
Customize  |  Hide

Search
Register
New posts
Unanswered

m21#26

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews  
  Oldest Best Reply
Search for:
 
Print view
First unread post
Author Message
Director
Director
Joined: 23 Apr 2010
Posts: 595
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 7

m21#26 [#permalink] New post 12 Dec 2011, 04:57
00:00

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
If the salt concentration in Northern Lake increased by 20% from 1900 to 2000 while that in Southern Lake decreased by 10%, is the current salt concentration in Northern Lake higher than that in Southern Lake?

(1) In 1900 the salt concentration in Southern Lake was 10% higher than that in Northern Lake
(2) In 1900 the salt concentration in Southern Lake was 4%

Can someone please explain why (2) is not sufficient? My reasoning for (2) is like this:
Since the salt concentration in Southern Lake decreased by 10% and from (2) we know that it was 4% in 1900, we can conclude that this concentration was 0 in 2000. Now, even if the concentration in Northern Lake was zero in 1900, we know that it increased by 20%, so it must be greater than zero in 2000. Thus, in 2000 the concentration of salt in NL is greater than in SL.

Please clarify.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Disbelief! The Countdown Begins
Affiliations: CFA
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 219
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Johnson '15 (M)
GMAT 1: 600 Q45 V28
GMAT 2: 670 Q44 V39
GMAT 3: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.5
WE: Accounting (Insurance)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 7

Re: m21#26 [#permalink] New post 12 Dec 2011, 14:13
The question is looking at percentages.

So when it says Southern lake was 4% in 1900 and decreased 10% by 2000, it is asking you to take 10% of 4% (.4%). The new percentage of salt concentration should be 3.6% in the Southern Lake.

I believe the answer should be C.
Director
Director
Joined: 23 Apr 2010
Posts: 595
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 7

Re: m21#26 [#permalink] New post 13 Dec 2011, 03:12
The OA is actually (A).

The question says:

Quote:
decreased by 20%


For example: Quantity of sugar decreased by 10% (of the original quantity). It means that if it were 100%, now it is 90% (of the original quantity).

Quote:
In 1900 the salt concentration in Southern Lake was 4%


4% is of what quantity? Original?

Can someone please explain the question and specifically (2)?

Thanks a lot.
Re: m21#26   [#permalink] 13 Dec 2011, 03:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by

m21#26

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews  
Print view
First unread post

Moderator: Bunuel

Search for:


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®.

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources

www.gmac.com|www.mba.com