|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 268
Location: India
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
42
[0], given: 25
|
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to [#permalink]
 19 Jan 2010, 09:42
Question Stats:
44% (02:18) correct
55% (02:09) wrong based on 18 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 complete
_________________
Cheers,
SD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 368
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
140
[3] , given: 47
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
20 Jan 2010, 16:30
3
This post received
KUDOS
C is Correct 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 - No issues with this as the treaty doesn't give any specific deadlines. Hence postponement is not an open item(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 - The stem clearly states that each country is bound a specific action and hence this makes this point invalid.(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance - Correct. Reason, treaty has nothing about the clause if a certain country is not able to do the action due to some excuse, what should the dependent country do? Hence all the countries would keep on waiting for the notification.(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 Nope, the treaty talks about the completion of action triggers the next. Hence initiation of one action need not be notified. It's the closure of action which should be notified.(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete[/quote] Again, deadline is not an issue.
_________________
Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!! 
|Do not post questions with OA|Please underline your SC questions while posting|Try posting the explanation along with your answer choice|
|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|
~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tuck Thread Master
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 314
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
69
[0], given: 69
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
19 Jan 2010, 14:32
maybe C?
I do not have to comply to treaty unless other countries do the same. But how can I know that? Treaty specifies that the notification is to be sent only after completion of the action. It's most probable that everyone will simply wait for others to take action
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 154
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 1
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
19 Jan 2010, 14:33
I think its C, whats the OA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 268
Location: India
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
42
[0], given: 25
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
19 Jan 2010, 14:37
I actually I could not solve it. OA is Can you explain.
_________________
Cheers,
SD
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 268
Location: India
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
42
[0], given: 25
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
20 Jan 2010, 17:21
Thanks
_________________
Cheers,
SD
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 958
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 38
Kudos [?]:
559
[0], given: 40
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
23 Apr 2010, 04:56
I couldnt understand this stimulus as no conclusion is present. In the end it asked for open threads and I chose E. As per E - there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete. If one country didnt complete the action onbefore time then it wouldnt intimate other countries and similarly there is slippage in other countries date. SudiptoGmat 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 complete
_________________
Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 282
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
26
[0], given: 23
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
09 Apr 2012, 01:26
ykaiim wrote: I couldnt understand this stimulus as no conclusion is present. In the end it asked for open threads and I chose E. As per E - there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete. If one country didnt complete the action onbefore time then it wouldnt intimate other countries and similarly there is slippage in other countries date. SudiptoGmat 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 complete Ditto the same rreasoning I got and picked E ... actually C & E both kind of a probable one's ...
_________________
My GMAT Journey 540->680->730!
~ When the going gets tough, the Tough gets going!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2012
Posts: 117
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 5
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
03 Jan 2013, 06:51
yogesh1984 wrote: ykaiim wrote: I couldnt understand this stimulus as no conclusion is present. In the end it asked for open threads and I chose E. As per E - there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete. If one country didnt complete the action onbefore time then it wouldnt intimate other countries and similarly there is slippage in other countries date. SudiptoGmat 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 complete Ditto the same rreasoning I got and picked E ... actually C & E both kind of a probable one's ... same here ... still didn't understand the reason behind choosing C ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 179
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
22
[0], given: 5
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding [#permalink]
03 Jan 2013, 19:06
The reasoning behind C is that the treaty is binding on a country only when actions are taken by other countries but the actions taken are supposed to be simultaneous. For the sake of simplicity, given two countries A and B, you may have the situation where A is waiting for B to take action and B is waiting for A to take action and so actually simultaneous actions can never be performed. So each country can give the excuse that the condition of compliance was not met and hence is not bound by the treaty.
_________________
Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
sravna@gmail.com
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1090
Followers: 538
Kudos [?]:
1136
[0], given: 131
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to [#permalink]
04 Jan 2013, 05:11
SudiptoGmat 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 complete Hi, As per discussion above, I think everyone agrees with option C as the contender for answer choice; however, some consider option E as the strongest contender and thus the answer choice. Let's read option E with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete. Does the ambiguity arise due to the simultaneous provision? The answer is no. This simultaneous provision doesn't bring in any ambiguity with respect to the dates; it only makes it possible that none of the countries would do it since the action of one is contingent on the action of all others. Thus, the answer to this is option C. Hope this helps  Feel free to ask in case further clarity is required. Meanwhile, dont forget to attend the SC session on Saturday. Please find the link below:  Thanks, Chiranjeev
_________________
Free trial:Click here to start free trial (100+ free practice questions)
Free Session (June 22): : Learn how to define your GMAT strategy, create your study plan and master the core skills to excel on the GMAT. Click here to attend.
   
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to
[#permalink]
04 Jan 2013, 05:11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
