kunals31: You answered the question right and your analysis was spot-on till the very last sentence. Please have a look at the red part in your solution below:

kunals31 wrote:

The people who took a vacation as well as got a promotion is 25%. Hence, the people who took a vacation but did not get a promotion is 50%. This means that the people who neither took a vacation nor got a promotion is 10% of the total. Thus, the people who got a promotion but did not take a vacation is (100-50-25-10)%, i.e. 15%. This means that the number of people who got a promotion is 35% of the total.

Thus, both statements considered together are SUFFICIENT.

The correct % of people who got a promotion is 40%. Had this been a PS question, even this mistake in the last step would have led to you marking a wrong answer choice.

Mechmeera: This 25% number refers to the number of employees who took a vacation AND got a promotion. What about the employees who didn't take a vacation and got a promotion?

Mechmeera wrote:

To make things simpler let us assume employees at a firm be 100.

employees who took vacation are 75.

1. this statement gives the information that the no of employees who took vacation and ( out of those1/3) who received promotion is 25. thereby it is 25% percent of the employees received a promotion. Stmt 1 is sufficient.

rohitd80: You got the answer right but please have a look at the red part in your solution below. The correct equation would have been 50 = 5x. This would have led you to the total % of promoted people = 40%

rohitd80 wrote:

2)

Given 50 is 500% of No Vacay folks who didn't get promoted

So 25 folks took no vacay…some got promoted and some did not.

Let x be the # of folks in the category of no vacay + no promo

so, 50 = 5 * (25-x)….hence, x = 15.....Again 2 alone is not sufficient to answer

1) + 2)

So, in total how many people got promoted = 10+25

Thus, 35% got promoted & Therefore both statements considered together are SUFFICIENT.

anewbeginning: You were absolutely right!

I hope you guys found this discussion useful!

Japinder

Thanks for the pointing the mistake.