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

 It is currently 07 Jul 2015, 19:30

### 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

# Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to

Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 221
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [1] , given: 0

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to [#permalink]  25 Aug 2008, 10:12
1
KUDOS
11
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

29% (02:17) correct 71% (01:46) wrong based on 523 sessions
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 994
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 110 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  25 Aug 2008, 10:42
d)
Manager
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma
Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Posts: 211
Schools: Harvard, Penn, Maryland
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 37 [4] , given: 3

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  26 Aug 2008, 16:46
4
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

Director
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 884
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 291 [1] , given: 33

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  26 Aug 2008, 17:43
1
KUDOS
B
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 286
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  26 Aug 2008, 19:00
puma wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simuptaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simuptaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

a) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty

b) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required

c) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance

d) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action

e) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

C seems like the only answer that would satisfy this weird treaty. Each country will wait for the other six to complete the action and notify it. This will never happen.
Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 12
Location: Research Triangle Park, NC
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  26 Aug 2008, 19:22
I think "C" is right, too.

It seems that there is no mechanism to communicate the start. Although there is a mechanism to communicate completion and a fixed date on which the actions must be performed.

Sound right?

cP
_________________

Just a few electrons short of a full cloud...

Intern
Joined: 13 Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  27 Aug 2008, 02:30
I will go for "C"
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 994
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 110 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  27 Aug 2008, 07:57
Great explanation.

dk94588 wrote:
couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

Manager
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 221
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  27 Aug 2008, 09:30
OA is C
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 500
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 149

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  24 Nov 2010, 05:47
If each country has to wait for the others to complete their tasks first and then send this particular country the Task completion signal, then there is always the possibility that each of the countries is kept waiting for the signals from others.In this way none of the countries will have done its task,and will have the excuse that it did not receive the signal from the others.
Hence C.
It seems as if D is a paraphrase of the stimulus .
Any good reason to eliminate D.
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !

Manager
Status: I rest, I rust.
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 121
Schools: ISB - Co 2013
WE 1: IT Professional since 2006
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 106 [0], given: 8

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  24 Nov 2010, 07:15
dk94588 wrote:
couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

I thought along the similar lines and decided that for any country to start the action, that country must know that others have atleast initiated (if not finished) their part of the bargain too. Or else all the countries might keep waiting indefinetly (software professionals would remember something similar from Pressman's Software engineering book)

But now that you put it the way you do, I am of the opinion that C expresses it better.
_________________

Respect,
Vaibhav

PS: Correct me if I am wrong.

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 5682
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 1416

Kudos [?]: 7362 [5] , given: 186

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  24 Nov 2010, 11:10
5
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
puma wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously.
When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?'

Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously."
What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight].

Anyway, let's go on to the options.
Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant.

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
No relevance to the simultaneous provision.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously."

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date.

_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Verbal Forum Moderator Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Posts: 500 WE 1: 4 years Tech Followers: 11 Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 149 Re: CR: treaty [#permalink] 24 Nov 2010, 11:33 VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: puma wrote: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action. The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty. (B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required. (C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance. (D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. (E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete. Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously. When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?' Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously." What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight]. Anyway, let's go on to the options. Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty. The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant. (B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required. No relevance to the simultaneous provision. (C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance. Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously." (D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another. (E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete. The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date. Answer (C) karishma dont u think D is a paraphrase of the stimulus _________________ My Post Invites Discussions not answers Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now ! Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 5682 Location: Pune, India Followers: 1416 Kudos [?]: 7362 [4] , given: 186 Re: CR: treaty [#permalink] 24 Nov 2010, 12:31 4 This post received KUDOS Expert's post mundasingh123 wrote: karishma dont u think D is a paraphrase of the stimulus Actually, I think the stimulus and option (D) say different things. Stimulus says: All 7 had to perform specified actions on a fixed date simultaneously. Each country was to notify six others when it had completed its action. (D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. D says that one country initiated its actions only after it received a signal from other countries that they had completed their actions. This is against the simultaneous specification of the treaty mentioned in the stimulus. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 147
Location: So. CA
WE 1: 2 IT
WE 2: 4 Software Analyst
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 57

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  24 Nov 2010, 22:45
man i fell for choice (D) too, but after reading Karishma's explanation, i have a better understanding now... +1 to you.
Manager
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 87
Location: India
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  25 Nov 2010, 04:43
A.
Though there is a fixed time when each action has to start, it is conditional on the actions of other countries and hence a

Posted from my mobile device
Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1721
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 78

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 109

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  25 Nov 2010, 13:07
+1 C
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 273
Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V31
GPA: 3
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 27

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  09 Jan 2011, 08:56
I narrowed the choices down to C and D.

On further analysis, I thought C is the best. In fact, it's the only one that really makes sense. D is simply paraphrasing the initial statement.
_________________

petrifiedbutstanding

Manager
Status: I am Midnight's Child !
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Posts: 148
WE 1: Software Design and Development
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 11

Re: CR: treaty [#permalink]  09 Jan 2011, 11:55
IMO C
_________________

Argument : If you love long trips, you love the GMAT.
Conclusion : GMAT is long journey.

What does the author assume ?
Assumption : A long journey is a long trip.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 133
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 12

Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to [#permalink]  28 Nov 2011, 21:39
C it is
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to   [#permalink] 28 Nov 2011, 21:39

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 27 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to 5 01 Jun 2006, 00:23
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to 4 12 Nov 2005, 06:14
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to 2 21 Oct 2005, 06:06
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to 11 16 Oct 2005, 09:34
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to 21 18 Sep 2005, 16:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by