Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 144
Concentration: Finance, Economics

If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Jun 2012, 02:53
Question Stats:
54% (01:29) correct 46% (01:30) wrong based on 1490 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? (1) m < p (2) m < 0
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/ Login.
_________________
Kudos if you like the post!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.




Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59125

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Jun 2012, 02:55
If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?Given: \(mv<pv<0\) > two cases: If \(v>0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m<p<0\); If \(v<0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m>p>0\) (flip the sign when dividing by negative value). (1) m < p > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient. (2) m < 0 > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient. Answer: D. Hope it's clear.
_________________




Intern
Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 15
GMAT Date: 05282015
GPA: 3.48

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Oct 2014, 07:27
Stiv wrote: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
(1) m < p (2) m < 0 Statement 1 : Since m<p (mp)<0 We also know that mv<pv ie (mp)v<0 Since (mp)<0 therefore v>0 SUFFICIENT Statement 2: Given m<0 Since mv<0 therefore v > 0 SUFFICIENT Hence (D)




Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9788
Location: Pune, India

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Jun 2012, 04:00
Stiv wrote: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
(1) m < p (2) m < 0 You can solve such questions easily by restating '< 0' as 'negative' and '> 0' as 'positive'. mv < pv < 0 implies both 'pv' and 'mv' are negative and mv is more negative i.e. has greater absolute value as compared to pv. Since v will be equal in both, m will have a greater absolute value as compared to p. When will mv and pv both be negative? In 2 cases: Case 1: When v is positive and m and p are both negative. Case 2: When v is negative and m and p are both positive. So how will we know whether v is positive? If we know that at least one of m and p is negative, then v must be positive. If at least one of m and p is positive, then v must be negative. Now that we understand the question and the implications of the given data, we go on to the statements. Stmnt 1: m < p m has greater absolute value as compared to p but it is still smaller than p. This means m must be negative. If m is negative, p must be negative too which implies that v must be positive. Sufficient. Stmnt 2: m < 0 Very straight forward. m and p both must be negative and v must be positive. Sufficient. Answer (D) Check this post for a very similar question: ifzyxy0isxzxz101210.html#p1098097
_________________
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
Status: Aiming for 750+
Joined: 16 Oct 2013
Posts: 21
GMAT Date: 05052014

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jan 2014, 00:53
I am sorry but I somehow still dont understand. I chose B, which I know is incorrect.
Well, let me tell you why I do not understand the Stmt. 1 is sufficient.
Given: mv<pv<0. It is given that MV and PV ARE ve. This means, When V is ve, M,P are +ve and vice versa.
I tabulated as below:
m v p mv pv +  +    +   
Now, statement 1 says m < p. It does not say if they are negative or positive.
So, it is possible that:
3 < 5 (m=3 and p=5) and this means V is ve
OR
3 < 1 (m=3 and p=1) and this means V is +ve
Different answers so stmt 1 should be insufficient. What I am missing?
Thank you!



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59125

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jan 2014, 01:20
flower07 wrote: I am sorry but I somehow still dont understand. I chose B, which I know is incorrect.
Well, let me tell you why I do not understand the Stmt. 1 is sufficient.
Given: mv<pv<0. It is given that MV and PV ARE ve. This means, When V is ve, M,P are +ve and vice versa.
I tabulated as below:
m v p mv pv +  +    +   
Now, statement 1 says m < p. It does not say if they are negative or positive.
So, it is possible that:
3 < 5 (m=3 and p=5) and this means V is ve
OR
3 < 1 (m=3 and p=1) and this means V is +ve
Different answers so stmt 1 should be insufficient. What I am missing?
Thank you! Ask yourself: if m=3 and p=5 and v is negative, say 1, does mv < pv< 0 hold true?
_________________



Intern
Status: Aiming for 750+
Joined: 16 Oct 2013
Posts: 21
GMAT Date: 05052014

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jan 2014, 01:31
Bunuel wrote: Ask yourself: if m=3 and p=5 and v is negative, say 1, does mv < pv< 0 hold true? Aha!! I get it now. So, when m=3, p=5 and v is ve, mv (3) becomes > pv (5) making the given condition void. So, Stmt 1 is sufficient. Great learning for the day. (This makes me wanna repeat to myself  When you pick numbers, quickly plug in to see if they are correct) I also figured this just now: mv < pv < 0 (mvpv) <0 v(mp)<0 If v is +ve, m<p (This is what the Statement 1 is saying too) If v is ve, m>p So, the answer is D. Thank you!!



Retired Moderator
Joined: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 1090
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GPA: 2.49
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

Re: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
18 Oct 2014, 02:06
Bunuel wrote: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
Given: \(mv<pv<0\) > two cases:
If \(v>0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m<p<0\); If \(v<0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m>p>0\) (flip the sign when dividing by negative value).
(1) m < p > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient. (2) m < 0 > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient.
Answer: D.
Hope it's clear. I understood Bunuel's explanation for statement1 but following values makes statement1 insufficient. Please help me understand this: (1) m<p lets take v=1, m=3, p=2 it gives mv=3, pv=2 and hence does not violate mv<pv<0 as 3<2<0, so v is +ve here lets take v=1, m=3, p=2 it gives mv=3, pv=2 and hence does not violate mv<pv<0 as 3<2<0 but v is ve here Thanks
_________________



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 59125

Re: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
18 Oct 2014, 02:13
HKD1710 wrote: Bunuel wrote: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
Given: \(mv<pv<0\) > two cases:
If \(v>0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m<p<0\); If \(v<0\) then when dividing by \(v\) we would have: \(m>p>0\) (flip the sign when dividing by negative value).
(1) m < p > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient. (2) m < 0 > we have the first case, so \(v>0\). Sufficient.
Answer: D.
Hope it's clear. I understood Bunuel's explanation for statement1 but following values makes statement1 insufficient. Please help me understand this: (1) m<p lets take v=1, m=3, p=2 it gives mv=3, pv=2 and hence does not violate mv<pv<0 as 3<2<0, so v is +ve here lets take v=1, m=3, p=2 it gives mv=3, pv=2 and hence does not violate mv<pv<0 as 3<2<0 but v is ve here Thanks m = 3 and p = 2 violate the first statement, which says that m < p.
_________________



Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 461
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)

If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
29 Dec 2015, 16:19
Stiv wrote: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
(1) m < p (2) m < 0 (1) means both m and p are negative, so in order \(mv\) and \(pv\) to be < 0, \(v\) must be greater than zero. (If it's ve mv will > 0) (2) same is in (1) m<0 means \(m\) is ve, and in order mv to be negative v must be greater than zero. Answer D
_________________
When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.
Share some Kudos, if my posts help you. Thank you !
800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50 GMAT PREP 670 MGMAT CAT 630 KAPLAN CAT 660



Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 600
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
13 Feb 2017, 18:47
I believe it is D. Case 1) m < p mv < pv < 0 mv  pv < pv  pv < pv . Subtract pv v(mp) < 0 < pv Since m < p OR (m  p) < 0 Therefore, v must be positive. SUFF Case 2) m < 0 Since mv < 0 (given), v must be positive. SUFF Hence D.
_________________
Thanks & Regards, Anaira Mitch



Director
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Posts: 563
GMAT 1: 670 Q46 V36 GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V38

Re: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Aug 2019, 10:45
enigma123 wrote: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
(1) m < p (2) m < 0 Main Topic Inequalities Rule: Multiplying/dividing inequalities by + variable: Don't flip sign  variable: Flip sign Divide by v If v = +, then m < p < 0 If v = , then m > p > 0 1) Implies v = +. Sufficient. 2) Implies v = +. Sufficient. ANSWER: D
_________________
Most Comprehensive Article on How to Score a 700+ on the GMAT (NEW) Verb Tenses SimplifiedIf you found my post useful, KUDOS are much appreciated. Giving Kudos is a great way to thank and motivate contributors, without costing you anything.



Math Revolution GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Aug 2015
Posts: 8149
GPA: 3.82

Re: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Aug 2019, 12:27
enigma123 wrote: If mv < pv< 0, is v > 0?
(1) m < p (2) m < 0 Forget conventional ways of solving math questions. For DS problems, the VA (Variable Approach) method is the quickest and easiest way to find the answer without actually solving the problem. Remember that equal numbers of variables and independent equations ensure a solution. Visit https://www.mathrevolution.com/gmat/lesson for details. The first step of the VA (Variable Approach) method is to modify the original condition and the question. Then we recheck the question. We should simplify conditions if necessary. \(mv < pv\) \(⇔ mv  pv < 0\) \(⇔ v(mp) < 0\) Since the original condition is equivalent to \(v(mp) < 0\), the question is equivalent to \(m  p < 0\) or \(m < p\). This is same as condition 1). Thus condition 1) is sufficient. Condition 2) When we consider both condition 2), \(m < 0\) and the original condition, \(mv < 0\), we have \(v > 0\). Thus condition 2) is also sufficient. Therefore, D is the answer.
_________________
MathRevolution: Finish GMAT Quant Section with 10 minutes to spareThe oneandonly World’s First Variable Approach for DS and IVY Approach for PS with ease, speed and accuracy. "Only $79 for 1 month Online Course""Free Resources30 day online access & Diagnostic Test""Unlimited Access to over 120 free video lessons  try it yourself"



NonHuman User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 13604

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v < 0 ? m < p m < 0 mv
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Oct 2019, 01:25
Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot! Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up  doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos). Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________




Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v < 0 ? m < p m < 0 mv
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2019, 01:25






