Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2212:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 1612:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
You’re first to know: Save $200 on GMAT prep starting tomorrow, 4/13. Get 6 official practice tests and study with real questions. Be ready to save!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
26 Dec 2025, 08:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
A -> The first part is correct but the second is not an acceptance of the first rather a reversal of the forecast.
B -> The first may not be a structural weakness as it would be a definite way to reject the plan. The second does partially present an unrelated consideration for going through with the plan.
C -> The first "mentioned of other firms" can be termed as evidence. the second does not qualify it but presents a completely different reason for the acceptance
D -> Correct. This first depends on a historical precedent. The second provides contradicting reasons such as previous execution experience etc.
E -> The first part is correct. The second part is not just a conclusion but the conclusion along with the justification, but we don't know if it is more compelling.
Option D
B -> The first may not be a structural weakness as it would be a definite way to reject the plan. The second does partially present an unrelated consideration for going through with the plan.
C -> The first "mentioned of other firms" can be termed as evidence. the second does not qualify it but presents a completely different reason for the acceptance
D -> Correct. This first depends on a historical precedent. The second provides contradicting reasons such as previous execution experience etc.
E -> The first part is correct. The second part is not just a conclusion but the conclusion along with the justification, but we don't know if it is more compelling.
Option D
Bunuel
26 Dec 2025, 08:09
Kudos
Bookmarks
A The second boldfaced does not agree with the criticism. Funding was still approved.
B The second boldfaced is not separate or irrelevant. The founder's past success and the partnership directly relate to whether the growth plan could work.
C The second boldfaced focuses on specific advantages of this company, not on broader market dynamic.
D CORRECT. First boldfaced points out a reason to doubt the growth projection. Second boldfaced explains why the decision-makers went ahead anyway, citing strengths that made them confident despite the doubt.
E The second boldfaced does not rely on an assumption. It relies on concrete evidence.
The correct answer is D
B The second boldfaced is not separate or irrelevant. The founder's past success and the partnership directly relate to whether the growth plan could work.
C The second boldfaced focuses on specific advantages of this company, not on broader market dynamic.
D CORRECT. First boldfaced points out a reason to doubt the growth projection. Second boldfaced explains why the decision-makers went ahead anyway, citing strengths that made them confident despite the doubt.
E The second boldfaced does not rely on an assumption. It relies on concrete evidence.
The correct answer is D
26 Dec 2025, 08:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
Tough call between E and D, but I selected D.
The first sentence provides context / sets the stage for the argument. I would call it a premise. The second sentence provides evidence that would seem to be an example of this premise. The third sentence, the first boldface, follows the logical conclusion of the premise when evaluating the evidence. The fourth sentence provides reasons which were considered strong enough to disregard the initial premise.
A - The first part seems to be generally correct, but the second part is not correct because the decision for funding does support the forecast's plausibility.
B - The first part of this choice also seems to be generally correct, and the second part on the surface seems appropriate, however, the phrase 'unrelated consideration' does not seem to be accurate; the two cited factors seem to me to be relevant to evaluating whether the projections will work.
C - The first part of this choice could fit, however, the second part does not support a 'broader market dynamic,' it's referencing specific things.
D - Yes, the first is a clear objection based on historical precedent. The second could be considered a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection. Seems to me to fit the best.
E - The only part of this I do not think fits is the 'more compelling assumption,' the last part is not really an assumption, it's additional evidence that supports rejecting the rejection.
The first sentence provides context / sets the stage for the argument. I would call it a premise. The second sentence provides evidence that would seem to be an example of this premise. The third sentence, the first boldface, follows the logical conclusion of the premise when evaluating the evidence. The fourth sentence provides reasons which were considered strong enough to disregard the initial premise.
A - The first part seems to be generally correct, but the second part is not correct because the decision for funding does support the forecast's plausibility.
B - The first part of this choice also seems to be generally correct, and the second part on the surface seems appropriate, however, the phrase 'unrelated consideration' does not seem to be accurate; the two cited factors seem to me to be relevant to evaluating whether the projections will work.
C - The first part of this choice could fit, however, the second part does not support a 'broader market dynamic,' it's referencing specific things.
D - Yes, the first is a clear objection based on historical precedent. The second could be considered a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection. Seems to me to fit the best.
E - The only part of this I do not think fits is the 'more compelling assumption,' the last part is not really an assumption, it's additional evidence that supports rejecting the rejection.
