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

 It is currently 29 Aug 2016, 17:38

### 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

# The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 21 Oct 2012
Posts: 9
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [2] , given: 11

The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 12:14
2
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

39% (02:05) correct 61% (01:14) wrong based on 233 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The latest review of pay scales in a particular company shows that g officers get paid an average of 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, compared to a ratio of 1.3 times ten years ago.

(A) that marketing officers get paid an average of 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, compared to a ratio of 1.3 times
(B) marketing officers who get paid on average 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio
(C) that, on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio
(D) marketing officers now having an average of 1.8 times the salary of a product development engineers, compared to the ratio of 1.3 times
(E) that, on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, a ratio that compares to 1.3 times

Can any one elaborate this question for me? I am really confused.
source: gmatpill
[Reveal] Spoiler:
C
!!??
why? god!! why?!!
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 204 [2] , given: 32

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 13:48
2
KUDOS
Hey welcome to GMAT club...:D

ARASHFRX wrote:
why? god!! why?!!

hhmm...I sensed some one called me... LOL jk.

IMO C should be right for the reasons marked in blue

marketinThe latest review of pay scales in a particular company shows that g officers get paid an average of 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, compared to a ratio of 1.3 times ten years ago.

(A) that marketing officers get paid an average of 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, compared to a ratio of 1.3 times
(B) marketing officers who get paid on average 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio
(C) that, on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio
(D) marketing officers now having an average of 1.8 times the salary of a product development engineers, compared to the ratio of 1.3 times
(E) that, on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, a ratio that compares to 1.3 times

1st you can simply eliminate B and D because review of pay scale in a particular company shows maketing officers? NO
review of pay scale shows some facts about them.
Now we are left with A , C and E
In E, we have "a ratio that compares to 1.3 times" how can a rato compare anything. that's not possible so KILL E
In A we have at the end we have "1.3 times" we can use 1.3 times as used here; we have to mention 1.3 times of something (see option C)
1.3 times of What of ten years ago? for this reason we can kill A.

Left with C.

Cheers
Intern
Joined: 21 Oct 2012
Posts: 9
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 11

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 14:24
Jp27 wrote:
In A we have at the end we have "1.3 times" we can use 1.3 times as used here; we have to mention 1.3 times of something (see option C)
1.3 times of What of ten years ago? for this reason we can kill A.

you mentioned that we need 1.3 times of sth, however in C we don't have it.
on the other hand, putting C in the question, we have :

on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio ten years ago.

the end of this sentence is somehow awkward, isn't it?!
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 204 [0], given: 32

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2012, 21:27
ARASHFRX wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
In A we have at the end we have "1.3 times" we can use 1.3 times as used here; we have to mention 1.3 times of something (see option C)
1.3 times of What of ten years ago? for this reason we can kill A.

you mentioned that we need 1.3 times of sth, however in C we don't have it.
on the other hand, putting C in the question, we have :

on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio ten years ago.

the end of this sentence is somehow awkward, isn't it?!

hey - We have 1.3 times their pay. -> here "their pay" refers to development engineers's pay.
Look at the stark parallelism between the comparison.

1.8 times the salary of product development engineers || 1.3 times their salary
Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Posts: 168
Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.3
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 190 [1] , given: 31

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2012, 00:23
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
ARASHFRX wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
In A we have at the end we have "1.3 times" we can use 1.3 times as used here; we have to mention 1.3 times of something (see option C)
1.3 times of What of ten years ago? for this reason we can kill A.

you mentioned that we need 1.3 times of sth, however in C we don't have it.
on the other hand, putting C in the question, we have :

on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio ten years ago.

the end of this sentence is somehow awkward, isn't it?!

In the first answer choice there is a comparison error. whenever quantities by multiplication are related, Usage of than or more is incorrect.

Thus, Salary of marketing officer is 1.3 times (multiplication) the salary of development manager.

You can check this concept if you have
Manhattan SC Edn 4 Pg 256 : Numbers in Comparison.
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 63

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2012, 23:40
Apples & oranges question as GMAT pill would classify it. keyword is "THAN" What are we comparing? look to the left and right of "THAN" the salary of marketing officers to development engineers that isn't the same thing. so we can rule out A and B.

D has many issues unnecessary use of "having" also we need the word that.

so now we are left with C and E. There is a phrasing issue we need the ratio cos the sentence won't make sense with E.

Hope that helps.

Click kudos +1 if my post helped.
Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 2035
Concentration: Finance
GMAT 1: 770 Q0 V
Followers: 54

Kudos [?]: 516 [0], given: 355

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 May 2014, 17:00
Can we get a nice review of answer choices by one of our in-house Verbal experts here?

Would be happy to throw some Kudos out there!
Cheers!!
J
Intern
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 2

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 May 2014, 01:08
jlgdr wrote:
Can we get a nice review of answer choices by one of our in-house Verbal experts here?

Would be happy to throw some Kudos out there!
Cheers!!
J

Hi jlgdr,

Why wait for the experts when we can solve it on our own.

Let’s first understand the structure and meaning of the sentence.

The latest review of pay scales in a particular company shows
o that marketing officers get paid
• an average of 1.8 times more salary than product development engineers,
o compared to a ratio of 1.3 times ten years ago.

MEANING

• So, the sentence tells us about a review of pay scales in a company that compares the average salary of the marketing officers with the average salary of product development engineers.
• This review shows that the salary of marketing officers is 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers as compared to the ratio of 1.3 times ten years ago.

There are two comparisons going on in this sentence.

Comparison I: The salary of marketing officers is compared to the salary of product development engineers. The ratio is 1.8.
Ten years ago this ratio was 1.3.

Comparison II: The above two ratios are also compared to each other.

Now, let’s move on to the options:

OPTION A

1. It is unidiomatic to say ‘…1.8 times more salary than… ’. The correct idiomatic usage are ‘…1.8 times….’ or ‘…more than… ’.

6 is 3 times 2. Correct
6 is 4 more than 2. Correct
6 is 2 times more than 3. Incorrect

2. In the phrase ‘compared to a ratio of 1.3 times ten years ago’, it is not clear what is the ratio of.

3. In comparison I ‘1.8 times more salary’ is compared to ‘product development engineers’.

The salary of Roger is more than Ron. (salary of Roger is compared to Ron)

The salary of Roger is more than that of Ron. (‘that’ refers to ‘the salary’)

4. In comparison II, ‘an average of 1.8 times more salary’ is compared to ‘a ratio of 1.3 times’.

OPTION B

1. It is unidiomatic to say ‘…1.8 times more salary than… ’. The correct idiomatic usage are ‘…1.8 times….’ or ‘…more than… ’.

2. This option states that review of pay scales shows marketing officers. This does not make sense.

3. In comparison I ‘1.8 times more salary’ is compared to ‘product development engineers’.

OPTION C

Marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers. (Logical Comparison)

‘1.8 times the salary’ is compared to ‘1.3 times their salary’. The ratios of the salaries are compared.

OPTION D

1. Singular article ‘a’ cannot be used with plural noun ‘product development engineers’.

2. In comparison II, ‘an average of 1.8 times the salary’ is compared to ‘the ratio of 1.3 times’.

3. This sentence means that marketing officers now possess (having) 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers. This does not make sense. The salary is said to be paid. It cannot be possessed.

OPTION E

1. In the phrase ‘a ratio that compares to 1.3 times’, ‘a ratio’ is compared to ‘1.3 times’.

Hope this helps!
Manyu

P.S.: I hope your kudos are not reserved for experts only.
Intern
Joined: 29 Aug 2013
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 4

Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 May 2014, 15:12
Vineetk wrote:
ARASHFRX wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
In A we have at the end we have "1.3 times" we can use 1.3 times as used here; we have to mention 1.3 times of something (see option C)
1.3 times of What of ten years ago? for this reason we can kill A.

you mentioned that we need 1.3 times of sth, however in C we don't have it.
on the other hand, putting C in the question, we have :

on average, marketing officers get paid 1.8 times the salary of product development engineers, as compared to 1.3 times their salary, the ratio ten years ago.

the end of this sentence is somehow awkward, isn't it?!

In the first answer choice there is a comparison error. whenever quantities by multiplication are related, Usage of than or more is incorrect.

Thus, Salary of marketing officer is 1.3 times (multiplication) the salary of development manager.

You can check this concept if you have
Manhattan SC Edn 4 Pg 256 : Numbers in Comparison.

Wow. Very helpful stuff, I had no idea about the usage of than or more with regards to quantities by multiplication. Thanks!
Re: The latest review of pay scales in a particular company show   [#permalink] 22 May 2014, 15:12
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
37 A recent review of pay scales 33 28 Nov 2009, 12:38
8 A recent review of pay scales indicates 23 24 Dec 2008, 15:30
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEOs now earn 9 08 Apr 2008, 20:05
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO's now earn 4 07 Jul 2007, 18:28
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEOs now earn 15 17 Oct 2006, 21:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by