Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 19:57 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 19:57
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
user22020
Joined: 31 Dec 2020
Last visit: 04 Jun 2024
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
60
 [60]
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 2
Kudos: 60
 [60]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
58
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,086
 [10]
8
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
parthwagh
Joined: 18 Oct 2022
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 101
Own Kudos:
141
 [1]
Given Kudos: 15
Posts: 101
Kudos: 141
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
user22020
Joined: 31 Dec 2020
Last visit: 04 Jun 2024
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 2
Kudos: 60
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­Thank you for the response. Could you elaborate on the simplication process here? 

"We can simplify this inequality as (w - m)/2 > -x. Since x is positive, this inequality tells us that the difference in the number of new male and female members is less than the difference in the original number of male and female members."

Shouldn't the simplication be (w-m)/2 > 0? since the 2 x's cancel out. and why does "(w - m)/2 > -x" tell us that the difference in the number of new male and female members are less than the difference in the original number of male and female members?
 
User avatar
sayan640
Joined: 29 Oct 2015
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,180
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 783
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
Products:
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
Posts: 1,180
Kudos: 813
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
they said that "­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year."
That does not mean initial number of men was = m
It can be even 2m of which m were members of club G last year.
Bunuel
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

This implies that men gained more than half, by x members, of their initial number, and women also gained more than half, also by x members, of their initial number. If the initial numbers of men and women were 10 and 20, and 6 (10/2 + 1) and 11 (20/2 + 1) men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 60%, while the number of women increased by less than 60%. However, if we reverse men and women's numbers, then we'd get the opposite answer. Hence, this statement alone is not sufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement alone is also insufficient. For example, if the initial numbers of men and women were 1 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 100%, while the number of women increased by 20%. However, if the initial numbers of men and women were 100 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 1%, while the number of women increased by 20%.

(1)+(2) Since more women than men became new members according to (2), we have (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which gives m < w. Since initially there were fewer men than women, x would constitute a greater percentage of m than of w. Therefore, half plus x for men would constitute a greater percentage than half plus x for women. Thus, the percent increase in the membership of men was greater than the percent increase in the membership of women. Hence, the combined statements are sufficient.

Answer: C.

P.S. Is this a GMAT Prep Focus question? Could you please post a screenshot of it? Thank you!­
­
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
778,086
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,086
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
sayan640
Bunuel
they said that "­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year."
That does not mean initial number of men was = m
It can be even 2m of which m were members of club G last year.
Bunuel
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

This implies that men gained more than half, by x members, of their initial number, and women also gained more than half, also by x members, of their initial number. If the initial numbers of men and women were 10 and 20, and 6 (10/2 + 1) and 11 (20/2 + 1) men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 60%, while the number of women increased by less than 60%. However, if we reverse men and women's numbers, then we'd get the opposite answer. Hence, this statement alone is not sufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement alone is also insufficient. For example, if the initial numbers of men and women were 1 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 100%, while the number of women increased by 20%. However, if the initial numbers of men and women were 100 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 1%, while the number of women increased by 20%.

(1)+(2) Since more women than men became new members according to (2), we have (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which gives m < w. Since initially there were fewer men than women, x would constitute a greater percentage of m than of w. Therefore, half plus x for men would constitute a greater percentage than half plus x for women. Thus, the percent increase in the membership of men was greater than the percent increase in the membership of women. Hence, the combined statements are sufficient.

Answer: C.

P.S. Is this a GMAT Prep Focus question? Could you please post a screenshot of it? Thank you!­
No. The phrase "All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year..." means that exactly m men and w women were members of the club last year.­
User avatar
jessicachenbobo
Joined: 21 Oct 2020
Last visit: 28 May 2025
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 15
Posts: 2
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Bunuel
Please consider the following case, which meets all the criteria in the question stem.
When x=1,
m=3 ->1 person joins m--> totaling 4 men, percent increase=33% increase.
w=6 -> 2 person joins w--> totaling 8 women, percent increase=33% increase.
In this particular case, the percentage increase in both men and women is the same, thus we could not conclude that the answer is "Yes" when (1) & (2) are combined.
Could you please advise where I am wrong? Thank you so much!!
User avatar
Gmatwhutwhut
Joined: 02 Aug 2021
Last visit: 15 May 2025
Posts: 19
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 47
Location: Singapore
Posts: 19
Kudos: 23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Bunuel,

Could i please ask, for (1) + (2) you stated that initially there were fewer men than woman, which was never stated in the question. As i'm reading it the whole thing about this question is that they could either be the same in the beginning m = w, or either could be larger.

Thank you for all your work
Bunuel
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

This implies that men gained more than half, by x members, of their initial number, and women also gained more than half, also by x members, of their initial number. If the initial numbers of men and women were 10 and 20, and 6 (10/2 + 1) and 11 (20/2 + 1) men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 60%, while the number of women increased by less than 60%. However, if we reverse men and women's numbers, then we'd get the opposite answer. Hence, this statement alone is not sufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement alone is also insufficient. For example, if the initial numbers of men and women were 1 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 100%, while the number of women increased by 20%. However, if the initial numbers of men and women were 100 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 1%, while the number of women increased by 20%.

(1)+(2) Since more women than men became new members according to (2), we have (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which gives m < w. Since initially there were fewer men than women, x would constitute a greater percentage of m than of w. Therefore, half plus x for men would constitute a greater percentage than half plus x for women. Thus, the percent increase in the membership of men was greater than the percent increase in the membership of women. Hence, the combined statements are sufficient.

Answer: C.

P.S. Is this a GMAT Prep Focus question? Could you please post a screenshot of it? Thank you!­
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
778,086
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,086
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Gmatwhutwhut
Hi Bunuel,

Could i please ask, for (1) + (2) you stated that initially there were fewer men than woman, which was never stated in the question. As i'm reading it the whole thing about this question is that they could either be the same in the beginning m = w, or either could be larger.

Thank you for all your work
Bunuel
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

This implies that men gained more than half, by x members, of their initial number, and women also gained more than half, also by x members, of their initial number. If the initial numbers of men and women were 10 and 20, and 6 (10/2 + 1) and 11 (20/2 + 1) men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 60%, while the number of women increased by less than 60%. However, if we reverse men and women's numbers, then we'd get the opposite answer. Hence, this statement alone is not sufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement alone is also insufficient. For example, if the initial numbers of men and women were 1 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 100%, while the number of women increased by 20%. However, if the initial numbers of men and women were 100 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 1%, while the number of women increased by 20%.

(1)+(2) Since more women than men became new members according to (2), we have (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which gives m < w. Since initially there were fewer men than women, x would constitute a greater percentage of m than of w. Therefore, half plus x for men would constitute a greater percentage than half plus x for women. Thus, the percent increase in the membership of men was greater than the percent increase in the membership of women. Hence, the combined statements are sufficient.

Answer: C.

P.S. Is this a GMAT Prep Focus question? Could you please post a screenshot of it? Thank you!­

From (2), we know that more women than men became new members of club G this year. According to (1), (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members. Therefore, (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which translates to m < w.
User avatar
Gmatwhutwhut
Joined: 02 Aug 2021
Last visit: 15 May 2025
Posts: 19
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 47
Location: Singapore
Posts: 19
Kudos: 23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thank you! I understand now that there are implicit constraints, as it doesn't seem from the question that m<w, and it doesn't say that explicitly either. But from the combined equations, it can be inferred what m<w
Bunuel
Gmatwhutwhut
Hi Bunuel,

Could i please ask, for (1) + (2) you stated that initially there were fewer men than woman, which was never stated in the question. As i'm reading it the whole thing about this question is that they could either be the same in the beginning m = w, or either could be larger.

Thank you for all your work
Bunuel
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

This implies that men gained more than half, by x members, of their initial number, and women also gained more than half, also by x members, of their initial number. If the initial numbers of men and women were 10 and 20, and 6 (10/2 + 1) and 11 (20/2 + 1) men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 60%, while the number of women increased by less than 60%. However, if we reverse men and women's numbers, then we'd get the opposite answer. Hence, this statement alone is not sufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement alone is also insufficient. For example, if the initial numbers of men and women were 1 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 100%, while the number of women increased by 20%. However, if the initial numbers of men and women were 100 and 10, and 1 and 2 men and women became new members, then the number of men increased by 1%, while the number of women increased by 20%.

(1)+(2) Since more women than men became new members according to (2), we have (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which gives m < w. Since initially there were fewer men than women, x would constitute a greater percentage of m than of w. Therefore, half plus x for men would constitute a greater percentage than half plus x for women. Thus, the percent increase in the membership of men was greater than the percent increase in the membership of women. Hence, the combined statements are sufficient.

Answer: C.

P.S. Is this a GMAT Prep Focus question? Could you please post a screenshot of it? Thank you!­

From (2), we know that more women than men became new members of club G this year. According to (1), (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members. Therefore, (m/2 + x) < (w/2 + x), which translates to m < w.
User avatar
mbaprepavi
Joined: 20 Jul 2024
Last visit: 18 Apr 2025
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 108
Location: India
Posts: 35
Kudos: 30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is wrong
m/2 will be 1.5
Also, we add m/2+x men.. Therefore men and women are always even.
You cannot have one and a half men..

PS: Although you could have two and a half men :cool: (IYKYK)


jessicachenbobo
Hi Bunuel
Please consider the following case, which meets all the criteria in the question stem.
When x=1,
m=3 ->1 person joins m--> totaling 4 men, percent increase=33% increase.
w=6 -> 2 person joins w--> totaling 8 women, percent increase=33% increase.
In this particular case, the percentage increase in both men and women is the same, thus we could not conclude that the answer is "Yes" when (1) & (2) are combined.
Could you please advise where I am wrong? Thank you so much!!
User avatar
MartyMurray
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,630
Own Kudos:
6,117
 [2]
Given Kudos: 173
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,630
Kudos: 6,117
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

The question is essentially the following:

Is \(\frac{\text{increase in men}}{m}\) greater than \(\frac{\text{increase in women}}{w}\)?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

We can see that (m/2)/m = (w/2)/w.

At the same time, we don't know the relative values of m and w. So, we don't know the relative values of x/m and x/w.

So, the information provided does not enable us to determine whether (m/2 + x)/m is greater than (w/2 + x)/w.

Insufficient.

(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

This statement does not tell us whether \(\frac{\text{increase in men}}{m}\) is greater than \(\frac{\text{increase in women}}{w}\).

After all, there could have been more or fewer women than men in the club last year. So, even though more women than men joined this year, the information provided does not enable us to determine the relative percentage increases in the numbers of men and women in the club.

Insufficient.

Statements (1) and (2) combined

From statement (1), we know that the number of men increased by (m/2 + x) and the number of women increased by (w/2 + x).

Then, from statement (2), we know that (w/2 + x) > (m/2 + x).

So, w/2 > m/2.

Accordingly, w > m.

So, x/w < x/m.

Thus, (w/2 + x)/w < (m/2 + x)/m.

Sufficient.

Correct answer: C
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,265
Kudos: 76,983
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
user22020
­All of the m men and w women who were members of club G last year are still members this year. From last year to this year, was the percent increase in the membership of men in club G greater than the percent increase in the membership of women in Club G?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0
(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year


Can someone exaplain why the answer is not E? Isn't it true that we know the number of new members is higher for women, and then we also know that the number of old members had more women than men. but the growth could be larger for either men or women depending on what the ratios are?­
­

Question: Is percent increase in number of men > percent increase in number of women?

(1) This year (m/2 + x) men and (w/2 + x) women became new members of club G, and x > 0

The percent increase in men \(= \frac{(m/2 + x)}{m} = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{x}{m}\)

The percent increase in women \(= \frac{(w/2 + x)}{w} = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{x}{w}\)

Who has seen a greater increase? We don't know. It depends on the relative values of m and w. Not sufficient



(2) More women than men became new members of club G this year

Not sufficient alone. Think about it. If say both increased by 50%, their percentage increase is same but if there were more women before, more women would have joined this year. Hence, just because more women joined this year, we cannot say that women saw a higher percentage increase.

Using both, now we know that (w/2 + x) > (m/2 + x) which means w > m
Hence we can now compare the percent increases. x/m > x/w (because m < w) and hence percent increase for men is greater.
Sufficient.

Answer (C)
Moderators:
Math Expert
105355 posts
496 posts