Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 13

A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2010, 11:55
Question Stats:
58% (02:25) correct 42% (02:16) wrong based on 529 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000? (1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials. (2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/ Login.




Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 60687

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2010, 12:04
asch13 wrote: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000?
(1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials.
(2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor Given: \(c=l+m\) Question is \(p=500c>150\) true? (1) \(c=3m\) > is \(5003m>150\) true? > is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? Not sufficient. (2) \(500(l+m)>l\) > \(500>2l+m\). Not sufficient. (1)+(2) Question became is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? From (1) \(c=l+m=3m\) > \(l=2m\). From (2) \(500>2l+m=4m+m=5m\) > \(m<100\). Sufficient. Answer: C.
_________________




Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 13

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2010, 12:05
Cost(C) = Labor(L) + Materials(M) Profit(P) = 500,000C is 500,000  C > 150,000? is C < 350,000
(1) C = 3M C = 3M = L + M, L = 2M
(2) P > L Substitute 2M for L P > 2M multiply both sides by 3/2 (3/2)P > 3M Substitute C for 3M (3/2)P > C plug 150,000 in for P (3/2)(150,000) > C 225,000 > C
So, C < 350,000 and the answer is yes, so then (1) and (2) together are sufficient




Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 13

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2010, 12:05
Bunuel wrote: asch13 wrote: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000?
(1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials.
(2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor Given: \(c=l+m\) Question is \(p=500c>150\) true? (1) \(c=3m\) > is \(5003m>150\) true? > is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? Not sufficient. (2) \(500(l+m)>l\) > \(500>2l+m\). Not sufficient. (1)+(2) Question became is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? From (1) \(c=l+m=3m\) > \(l=2m\). From (2) \(500>2l+m=4m+m=5m\) > \(m<100\). Sufficient. Answer: C. wow, that was fast, I was just typing my explanation, but yours looks much simpler. thanks



Intern
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 17

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2010, 12:53
My solution:
1) Total cost = 3M, Labor = 2M, NS
2) Profit >= Labor, NS
1) and 2) Profit >= 2M, therefore profit must be at least 2M/(2M+M+2M)*$500,000 = 2/5*$500,000, therefore profit >= $200,000. Sufficient.



Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 13

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Jul 2010, 06:28
dauntingmcgee wrote: My solution:
1) Total cost = 3M, Labor = 2M, NS
2) Profit >= Labor, NS
1) and 2) Profit >= 2M, therefore profit must be at least 2M/(2M+M+2M)*$500,000 = 2/5*$500,000, therefore profit >= $200,000. Sufficient. Could you please explain why profit must be at least 2M/(2M+M+2M)*500,000?



Intern
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 17

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Jul 2010, 06:57
Gladly.
Since from:
1) we know that Labor (L) = 2 * Materials (M), and 2) we know that Profit (P) >= L 1) and 2) combined show that P >= 2M
There are only three components of the $500,000: P, L and M, so P+L+M = $500,000. The minimum amount of P is the case that P = L = 2M. In order to find what fraction P is of P+L+M we simply take \(P/(P+M+L) = 2M/(2M+M+2M) = 2M/5M = 2/5\). Now that we know what fraction of the $500,000 is P, we simply multiply 2/5 * $500,000 to get $200,000. Sufficient.



Retired Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1532

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Feb 2011, 14:59
Total budget = 500
Is profit > 150
Or is expenditure < 350
1) Total cost = Material+Labor T = M+L T = 3M 3M = M+L 2M = L Labor cost is twice that of material. If M=1, L=2; T=3. Expenditure < 350. Yes M=150; L=300; T=450; Expenditure > 350. No. Not sufficient.
2) Company's Profit P>L M=0; L=249; P=251. Expenditure <350. Yes M=399; L=1; P=100. Expenditure <350. No. Not sufficient.
Combining 1 and 2; T=M+L=L/2+L T=(3/2)L P=500T=500(3/2)L P=500(3/2)L P>L 500(3/2)L>L 500>(5/2)L (5/2)L<500 L<200 Since M is half L. M should be <100 Even if we consider maximum of these; Total maximum expenditure = 200+100=300<350. Thus profit will always be >150.
Ans: "C"



Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10021
Location: Pune, India

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Feb 2011, 20:27
fluke wrote: Total budget = 500
Is profit > 150
Or is expenditure < 350
1) Total cost = Material+Labor T = M+L T = 3M 3M = M+L 2M = L Labor cost is twice that of material. If M=1, L=2; T=3. Expenditure < 350. Yes M=150; L=300; T=450; Actually, you may not want to use so many variables and then plug values. Chances of error are very high in this case. Preferably, stick to algebra or reason it out as follows: >>> A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. 500,000 is divided into 3 parts  Labor costs, material costs and profit. >>> Was the company's profit greater than $150,000? Was profit > 150,000? >>> (1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials. labor cost + material cost = 3 * material cost labor cost = 2* material costSo now we know that 500,000 is divided into 3 parts  2*material costs (labor), material costs and profit. But no idea what these costs and profit are. Not sufficient. >>> (2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor Profit > labor cost but no idea how much labor cost or material cost was. Not sufficient. Together, Profit > 2 material cost so even if it was greater than 2*material cost by a very very small amount, 500,000 would have been split into 3 parts: 2*material cost (labor), material cost and 2*material cost (profit) So 2*material cost would be at least 200,000. Hence profit is at least 200,000. Sufficient. Answer (C).
_________________
Karishma Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >



Intern
Joined: 22 Nov 2011
Posts: 7
Location: United States
GMAT Date: 01122012
GPA: 3.17
WE: Sales (Investment Banking)

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
27 Dec 2011, 14:07
when you combine TC (total cost)= 3m (material) TC= L (labor) + m = 3m so L=2M
500TC>2m (aka L) 500>5m m<100
500  less then 300= greater then 200k
C



Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 72
Location: United States

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jan 2012, 15:01
Rephrase: 500K  [L+M] >= 150K L+M <= 350K?
1. L+M = 3M => L = 2M. No info on M or L values, insuff. 2. L < 150K. M=? insuff
Together, L<150K, which means M<75K, which implies that the labor cost is 3M<3x75K=225K. Obviously, this means that profit > 150K. Suff.



Manager
Joined: 26 May 2013
Posts: 91

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Feb 2014, 23:50
Hi all. Bumping this topic because I didn't find an adequate answer explanation.
Here's mine:
Given :
Profit = 500,000  TC
TC = L + M
St. 1: (N.S.)
TC = 3M 3M = L + M 2M = L
St. 2: (N.S.)
P > L , since L = 2M , Profit > 2M
Both Statements:
P = 500,000  3M [TC = 3M from st. 1] 2M = 500,000  3M [P > L , P > 2M ] . Substitute 2M into the profit formula, knowing that the Profit number must be greater than 2M.
solve for M: ... M = $100,000. Plug into profit formula :
2($100,000) = $500,000  3($100,000)
Profit > $200,000
Answer choice C.



SVP
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2344
Concentration: Operations, Strategy

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 Jun 2015, 04:39
Bunuel wrote: asch13 wrote: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000?
(1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials.
(2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor Given: \(c=l+m\) Question is \(p=500c>150\) true? (1) \(c=3m\) > is \(5003m>150\) true? > is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? Not sufficient. (2) \(500(l+m)>l\) > \(500>2l+m\). Not sufficient. (1)+(2) Question became is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? From (1) \(c=l+m=3m\) > \(l=2m\). From (2) \(500>2l+m=4m+m=5m\) > \(m<100\). Sufficient. Answer: C. Hi Bunuel, In Statement 1 we concluded that m< 350/3= 116.66 So we can substitute the result in the equation 500(3*116)=152>150. We can choose number lower than 116. Choose 115 and apply in the equation 500(3*115)=155 > 150 any number lower than 350/3 will result in P>150. So Statement A should be Sufficient. What is wrong in my work?



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 60687

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 Jun 2015, 04:46
Mo2men wrote: Bunuel wrote: asch13 wrote: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000?
(1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials.
(2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for labor Given: \(c=l+m\) Question is \(p=500c>150\) true? (1) \(c=3m\) > is \(5003m>150\) true? > is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? Not sufficient.(2) \(500(l+m)>l\) > \(500>2l+m\). Not sufficient. (1)+(2) Question became is \(m<\frac{350}{3}\approx{117}\) true? From (1) \(c=l+m=3m\) > \(l=2m\). From (2) \(500>2l+m=4m+m=5m\) > \(m<100\). Sufficient. Answer: C. Hi Bunuel, In Statement 1 we concluded that m< 350/3= 116.66 So we can substitute the result in the equation 500(3*116)=152>150. We can choose number lower than 116. Choose 115 and apply in the equation 500(3*115)=155 > 150 any number lower than 350/3 will result in P>150. So Statement A should be Sufficient. What is wrong in my work? From (1) we don't know whether m<117. The question becomes "IS m<117".
_________________



Intern
Joined: 17 May 2016
Posts: 8

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
18 Jun 2016, 17:23
Hi all. I’m not very good at mathy explanations (more of a verbal guy), but I got this question right first time in about 2 minutes. Here is my logic to it:
The question stem tells us that the company was paid $500k for the project, and states that only labor and material are the costs. It then asks if the company’s profit is greater than 150k. Another way of thinking of that is asking if the costs were greater than $350k. (Since $500k payment – $350k cost = $150k profit)
Statement 1 tells us that the ratio of total cost to cost of material is 3 to 1. Because the question stem states the only other cost is labor, we know that the ratio of labor cost to material cost is 2:1. For every dollar of material there is 2 dollars of labor. Not sufficient on its own.
Statement 2 tells us the company profit is greater than its cost of labor. An important part of that is that it means profit is indeed a positive number! Not sufficient on its own.
With the statements combined we know that profit is greater than labor, and the ratio of labor to material is 2:1. The limit ends up being $200k profit, $200k labor, and $100k materials. The company’s actual costs have to be lower than this limit. Even the limit only has $300k of cost, which is much lower than $350k as asked in the question stem.
Answer is C.



Intern
Joined: 26 May 2014
Posts: 38
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
26 Oct 2016, 11:20
Converting the question into equations is the key to solving this question under two mins.
What does the question stem say > Cost (C) = Labour ( L ) + Material ( M )
Cost = 500 ( dividing by 1000, makes the calculations appear less daunting )
Is Profit > 150 ?
What is profit ? > Money Earned  Money Spent
Money Earned is > 500
So Profit ( P) = 500  C
Now, Rephrasing the question stem, Is 500  C > 150 which means, Is C < 350 ?
Now, lets look at both the options.
A) C=3M
No numerical given, so there is no way to ascertain the answer to our main question.
B) Profit is > Cost of Labour  Which in mathematical terms, means the following
500  C > L
now as we already know that C= L + M, L= C M
Substituting,
500 C > C  M ,
500 > 2C  M ( Again no numerical value available to prove C< 350 )
Now , Lets combine A and B
500 >2C  M and C= 3M,
Lets get everything in terms of C as our main question is in terms of C.
500 > 2C  C/3 ,
This gives us  > C < 300 , which is sufficient to answer our main question , Is C< 350 .
Answer is C.



Senior Manager
Status: Gathering chakra
Joined: 05 Feb 2018
Posts: 444

Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
Show Tags
15 Dec 2019, 16:33
asch13 wrote: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction project. The company's only costs for the project were for labor and materials. Was the company's profit greater than $150,000? (1) The company's total cost was three times its cost for materials.P = 500  C C = m + l C = 3m We can deduce that l = 2m, but still have no value for P = 500  3m Not sufficient (2) The company's profit was greater than its cost for laborP > l Not sufficient Together, We know P > l and that l = 2m So P > 2m We can use this (remembering that LHS is greater) 2m > 500  3m 5m > 500 m > 100 Since we know P > 2m, P > 200 so we can say yes to the question P>150?




Re: A construction company was paid a total of $500,000 for a construction
[#permalink]
15 Dec 2019, 16:33






