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

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 22:10

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
2 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1226
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 101 [2] , given: 0

Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 24 Dec 2004, 21:49
2
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?

A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country.
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas.
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines.
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 909
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 234 [0], given: 18

Re: reclamation of mined-out land [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2009, 10:41
I have a feeling it should be E. OA pls?

Why not C> We are talking about average reclamation cost. Now if the mining is 'ceased' in mountainous areas then this area wont be considered in calculating the average cost of reclamation.

Why E> If greater percentage of coal is mined now from surface mines then the average cost will come down.

ritjn2003 wrote:
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines
to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not
improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed
today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it
cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs
described?
A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation
costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal
mines in almost any other country.
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has
declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of
Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high
for mines in such areas.
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation
costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than
underground mines.
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in
Balzania today comes from surface mines.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 160
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 11

Re: reclamation of mined-out land [#permalink] New post 20 Jul 2009, 03:15
C, IMHO E does'nt attempt to explain why the prices have come down. In fact
@Economist:
Quote:
Why E> If greater percentage of coal is mined now from surface mines then the average cost will come down.

I could not gather why greater % coal mined from surface mines will bring the avg cost down. There is no comparison b/w mountainous v/s non mountainous costing in the question.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 852
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 106

Re: reclamation of mined-out land [#permalink] New post 20 Jul 2009, 09:07
Economist wrote:
I have a feeling it should be E. OA pls?
Why not C> We are talking about average reclamation cost. Now if the mining is 'ceased' in mountainous areas then this area wont be considered in calculating the average cost of reclamation.


Average = (X + Y+ Z....) /N

But if you remove higher values of the set, the average goes down. That's the intent of the option C

Economist wrote:
Why E> If greater percentage of coal is mined now from surface mines then the average cost will come down.

Why? This doesn't affect the average reclamation cost ($/ton).

Increase in surface mines => Increase in Coal Amount ==> But reclamation cost remains the same ($/ton) as technology doesn't change.

Here, C is correct. Example of above,

there are no. of shops sell item at price x,y,z / item. x>y>z

and tax = t%
from shop 1 => tx will be tax
shop2 => ty
shop 3 ==> tz

As shop1 is selling item at higher price, it is giving more tax /item than other shop.

So if shop1 is removed and only shop2 and shop3 types remain in the market average tax/item will decline.

Reclamation cost is similar to tax in this case; mountainous area is similar to the shop1.
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ... :beer
My debrief : journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2008
Posts: 609
Location: Kolkata,India
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 100

Re: CR:Balzania [#permalink] New post 26 Oct 2009, 03:08
Hmm..understood why C is the correct answer but could somebody please please explain B?
If the use of coal has declined then the coal prioces have decreased..which means that reclamation costs will also go down..:(
_________________

countdown-beginshas-ended-85483-40.html#p649902

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Time to apply!
Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Posts: 221
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V29
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 30 [1] , given: 166

Re: GWD CR: Balzania's regulation for land reclamation [#permalink] New post 25 Oct 2011, 23:16
1
This post received
KUDOS
Problem with B :
It says that the use of coal has been reduced. But that doesn't mean that mining is ceased. It its quite possible that the mining is still continued and the coal is exported to other countries.

Explanation of C ( CORRECT answer)

Let there be 3 sites in Balzania - site 1 , 2 and 3 - where surface mines were operated .
Let a , b and c tons of coal were processed from the 3 sites respectively
and the cost for reclamation be c1, c2 and c3 respectively.

then the average reclamation cost : (ac1 + bc2 + cc3)/ (a+ b+ c)
Now let site 3 be the mountainous area.

Now if site 3 stops mining,
then the average reclamation cost : (ac1 + bc2)/ (a+ b)

It is given that c3 is very high. Hence the new average reclamation cost should decrease provided the value of c is very small.

But this is the best answer here and we should go with choice C.
_________________

Didn't give up !!! Still Trying!!

Director
Director
avatar
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 708
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 37

Re: GWD CR: Balzania's regulation for land reclamation [#permalink] New post 26 Oct 2011, 06:55
Quote:
average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced


Average reclamation cost today = $ 4 per ton of coal.

Since the average is given per ton of coal, any choice that only talks about total amount of coal is irrelevant. B falls in that category. (as does E)

C wins.

Crick
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 261
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 20

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 17 Jan 2012, 05:38
Initially I thought the answer is B. But after seeing OA, I understand why C is correct answer.

The word 'average' in the argument is signalling it.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 37
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
GMAT Date: 05-28-2012
GPA: 3.23
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 5

Re: CR GMATREP [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2012, 00:51
Its C=> Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of
Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high
for mines in such areas.

earlier reclamation cost was high because => mining was done @ mountainous areas
now it cheap because => mining is done not @ mountainous areas ( other location where reclamation cost is less)
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 914
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 239 [0], given: 318

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 19 Feb 2013, 21:17
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines
to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not
improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed
today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it
cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

P1: -20 yrs -- regulations -- operators pay reclamation amount

P2: reclamation technology has not improved

C: Today : Cost is 4 $/ton as compared to >=10 $/ton before 20 yrs after regulations took place.


IMO The answer should be (E). As stated below:


Just after regulations : Total Coal : 1000 , Coal from surface mines: 100 (10%)

Now : Total Coal: 1000 ,Coal from surface mines: 200 (20%)

Other things being equal , if you are increasing the denominator than the expression will decrease.Here tons have increased ,thereby decreasing the dollar per ton Value.


Plz Advice !!
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1299

Kudos [?]: 3670 [1] , given: 185

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 19 Feb 2013, 21:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
@targetgmatchotu - I dont believe you are reading the question correctly. The reclamation costs refer only to the coal produced from surface mines, not the total coal produced. Hence, the reclamation costs/ton of coal do not change regardless of whether surface mine satisfy half or country's demand or 20% of the demand.

-Rajat
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 293
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V33
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 75

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 20 Feb 2013, 02:53
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines
to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not
improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed
today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it
cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs
described?
A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation
costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal
mines in almost any other country. . Out of scope. No comparison with other country is mentioned above
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has
declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years. Passage is about average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine, not about use of coal
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of
Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high
for mines in such areas.
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation
costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than
underground mines. OFS: Passage do not mention about any comparision
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in
Balzania today comes from surface mines. Passage is about average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine
_________________

YOU CAN, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN

1 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1120
Location: United States
Followers: 136

Kudos [?]: 1374 [1] , given: 122

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania.... [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2013, 14:09
1
This post received
KUDOS
Nice question. I picked D and got it wrong. But after review, C is the best.
This is resolve the paradox, so we don't have conclusion here, just fact.
Fac1: 20 years ago, there was a regulations requiring operators to pay for the reclamation.
Fac 2: Reclamation technology has not improve
Fac 3: But the AVERAGE reclamation cost today is 1/2 compared to that of 20 years ago.

Why: Key word here is AVERAGE reclamation cost (ARC). ARC is calculated from reclamation cost in Balzania, and reclamation costs from other areas. ARC will reduce, if operators move from high cost areas to lower cost areas. It means operators moved out Balzania to areas that have lower reclamation cost. That is C.


anish123ster wrote:
n y not B..???


B is out because it talks about the reduction of quantity (Q), but average cost couldn't decrease if cost/ton - Price (P) - did not decrease.
To be more clear, let try the equation.

Average cost = [Q1xP1 + Q2xP2 + ...........+ QnxPn] / [Q1 + Q2 +.....+ Qn]
Q1 = quantity in area 1; P1 = reclamation cost/ton in area 1
Q2 = quantity in area 2; P2 = reclamation cost/ton in area 2

B says [Q1 + Q2 +.....+ Qn] reduced, it means only the denominator decreased, but it doesn't say the numerator also decreased.
What if Q decreased, but P increased! Average cost will not decrease.

I hope it helps.

___________________________
Please kudo if my post helps!
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMV Chief of Design.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 453
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 70

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania.... [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2013, 17:58
A. Irrelevant. Comparison of reclamation cost of Balzania with reclamation cost of other country is out of scope.
B. Decline in use of coal as a fuel cannot possibly result in reduction in average reclamation cost.
C. Correct. This option mentioned about reducing high-cost operation which results in reduction in average reclamation cost.
D. There is no relevance of bringing in production cost for underground mines. We need to stick to the cost for surface mines only.
E. This statement has no useful information on how the average reclamation cost has been reduced.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 659
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 102 [0], given: 37

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania.... [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2013, 18:44
B cannot be the answer coz the use of coal as fuel will affect the demand side cost and not the supply side cost incurred by the manufacturer .yes u might argue that selling price of coal might get reduced but here we are not talking of the selling price of coal .we r talking of the cost incurred in taking out coal from mines !!
make sense ?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Feb 2013
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania.... [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2013, 22:14
I still cant understand as to why B cant be the answer. Since the demand of coal as a fuel has decreased, in order to make up that loss for the operators of surface mines and also to provide incentive, Bulzania might have decreased the reclamation cost..
Hence, I still feel that B should be the answer. Please let me know if I am wrong. Thanks in advance.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 453
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 70

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania.... [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2013, 23:46
revanthnov wrote:
I still cant understand as to why B cant be the answer. Since the demand of coal as a fuel has decreased, in order to make up that loss for the operators of surface mines and also to provide incentive, Bulzania might have decreased the reclamation cost..
Hence, I still feel that B should be the answer. Please let me know if I am wrong. Thanks in advance.


Option B is concerned with total reclamation cost and the argument is all about average reclamation cost. A decrease in total does NOT mean decrease in average. That's how option B is incorrect.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 79
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Leadership
GMAT 1: 590 Q40 V30
GPA: 3.98
WE: Project Management (Entertainment and Sports)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 17

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 24 Jan 2014, 02:25
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?

A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country.
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas.
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines.
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines.


My reasoning, If the government enacted a clampdown on regulations in the past but now that same price charged has been adjusted-down then something must have happened. The only thing that pops up in my head is that most likely after the clampdown industries' costs for mined-out land outweighed their profits and thus industries reasonably flee from the marked, obliging the government to re-adjust the tax.

Then I sighted the answers and saw that C was a good candidate. Picked and moved on.
_________________

Either suffer the pain of discipline, or suffer the pain of regret.

If my posts are helping you show some love awarding a kudos

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 03 May 2013
Posts: 326
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: ISB '16, IIMA (M)
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 47

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 26 Jan 2014, 11:32
CONCLUSION- Average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?

A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country.NO. WE TALK OF RECLAMATION COST HERE NOT COAL COST
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.COAL QUANTITY BEING USED IRRELEVANT.....
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas. THE MINE OPERATORS ARE CLEVER.... THEY HAVE REDUCED THE AVERAGE RECLAMATION COST BY REDUCING UPON HIGHER RECLAMATION RATE AREAS....
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines.NO SUCH COMPARISON REQUIRED HERE
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines.WHERE COAL COMES FROM IS IRRELEVANT


KUDOS IF YOU PLEASE......
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Posts: 3
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 3

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 07 May 2014, 16:59
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?

A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country...Premises dont talk about comparison between countries and neither the question stem mentions anythin about the same. IRRELEVENT

B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years...Uses of coal not relevent.

C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas...Areas where reclamation costs are high have been ceased to operate. Hence an overall decrease in the reclamation cost (area reclaimed/total cost..denominator stands the same while the numerator decreases)

D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines...No talk about underground mines. Hence irrelevent.

E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines...Again not a comparison between surface and other mine areas. Hence irrelevent.

Option B

I think the most important point is to concentrate on the stem and using the options we have to explain the given contradiction.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2013
Posts: 31
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 12

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations [#permalink] New post 19 May 2014, 11:51
A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country.
Out of scope. talks about operational costs, not reclamation costs
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.
tempting choice..however do not assume that costs will go down if there is no demand, a resolve the paradox must address the discrepancy without assuming anything
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas.
correct.. if reclamation costs are high for surface mining, ceasing surface mining on mountaineous areas will imply less mining, which in turn will give less reclamation costs, hence average will decline
D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines.
out of scope, talks about production costs
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines.
incorrect.. average costs will increase in this case
_________________

Consider Kudos if post found to be helpful :)

--------------------------------------------------------------
GMAT prep 1 : 650 Q49 V30
MGMAT 1 : 600 Q44 V30

Re: Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations   [#permalink] 19 May 2014, 11:51
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Experts publish their posts in the topic Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requirin Zatmah 2 24 Feb 2014, 07:29
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations anish123ster 0 07 Apr 2013, 01:07
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic CR Twenty years ago. Vavali 14 29 Mar 2008, 13:34
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations ttar 0 27 Jan 2012, 16:15
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations chunjuwu 0 27 Dec 2004, 09:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 40 posts ] 



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®.