Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 200
Concentration: Finance, Economics

If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Jun 2012, 02:53
Question Stats:
54% (00:31) correct 46% (00:36) wrong based on 1104 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: 46991

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
20 Jun 2012, 02:55




Intern
Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 16
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)




GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8119
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 Private Tutor for GMAT Contact: bansal.karishma@gmail.com



Director
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 818

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
05 Mar 2013, 07:09
I made a mistake of ignoring the info in the stiumulus and picked B instead silly error great explanation Bunuel And Karishma
_________________
Click +1 Kudos if my post helped...
Amazing Free video explanation for all Quant questions from OG 13 and much more http://www.gmatquantum.com/og13th/
GMAT Prep software What if scenarios http://gmatclub.com/forum/gmatprepsoftwareanalysisandwhatifscenarios146146.html



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: 46991

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?
_________________
New to the Math Forum? Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread  All You Need for Quant  PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!! Resources: GMAT Math Book  Triangles  Polygons  Coordinate Geometry  Factorials  Circles  Number Theory  Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets  PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders  GMAT Prep Software Analysis  SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS)  Tricky questions from previous years.
Collection of Questions: PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.
What are GMAT Club Tests? Extrahard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics



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!!



Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 562
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



Intern
Joined: 22 Jul 2016
Posts: 24

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
06 Jan 2017, 11:38
Given : \(mv<pv<0\) (a)
Statement 1) m < p I tried plugging numbers : m=3, p=2 to satisfy (a) consider different values of v : v is positive : v=5 , (3)(5) < (2)(5) < 0 = 15 < 10 < 0  satisfy (a) v is negative : v=5 , (3)(5) < (2)(5) < 0 = 15 < 10 < 0  does not satisfy (a) Hence, v must be positive
Statement 2) m < 0 from (a) , we can see that mv < 0 hence to satisfy mv < 0 when m < 0 , we need a positive value of v [(ve)*(+ve)=(ve)] Therefore v must be positive
Ans: D



Intern
Joined: 11 Jan 2015
Posts: 33

If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jan 2017, 14:58
Could someone (@Bunuel) please check this alternative approach?
Rephrase stem to \(mvpv<0\) > \(v(mp)<0\)
Stm 1: \(m<p\) > \(mp<0\), so \(v\) has to be positive for the above inequality to hold true. Sufficient.
Stm 2: Now this is where i screwed it up since i focused on my rephrased inequality and completely ignored the given one. Is there a way to draw the right conclusion from this inequality \(v(mp)<0\) in combination with the constraint \(m<0\) of stm 2?
Otherwise i have to adjust my approach for those kind of questions since i tought rephrasing the question stem would in most cases help to evaluate both statements. Probably in this case it made things more complicated...
Thank you!



Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 664
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



Manager
Joined: 11 Sep 2013
Posts: 149
Concentration: Finance, Finance

Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0? [#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Dec 2017, 07:48
1. m<p, if m and p are positive then v must be ve, for example 2(2)<3(2) = 4<6 ==== Not possible. So, m and p have to be ve and v is +ve. Suff 2. m is ve so v must be +ve. Suff
Ans D




Re: If mv < pv < 0, is v > 0?
[#permalink]
25 Dec 2017, 07:48






