Last visit was: 21 May 2024, 19:16 It is currently 21 May 2024, 19:16
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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Nov 2012
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [8]
Given Kudos: 29
Location: United States
WE:Engineering (Other)
Send PM
VP
VP
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Status:Chasing my MBB Dream!
Posts: 1057
Own Kudos [?]: 6279 [2]
Given Kudos: 330
Location: United States (DC)
WE:General Management (Aerospace and Defense)
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 194
Own Kudos [?]: 403 [1]
Given Kudos: 31
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: CBS '17
GPA: 4
WE:General Management (Consumer Products)
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 04 Jul 2011
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
1
Kudos
If p, q, r & s are non-zero numbers, Is pr/qs > r/q?
1) p>s
2) rq>0

From St. 1
p>s as not sufficient caus no information about signs of p&s and about r & q
From rq>o
r & q can be positive or negative
if both positive
pr/qs>r/q cancel r/q both sides and we get p>s (St. 1.)
both negative than p<s useless
Combining St. 1 and 2
we get p>s hence not relevant
Option E best answer.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93373
Own Kudos [?]: 625654 [4]
Given Kudos: 81918
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
4
Kudos
Expert Reply
Aurion wrote:
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q?

(1) p > s
(2) rq > 0

Dear Experts, kindly help me with the above problem. My pick was C, but it's incorrect.
pr/qs>r/q =>pqr >rqs => qr(p-s)>0. So i picked C. I guess i am missing something here. Request your help.


If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q?

Is \(\frac{r}{q}*\frac{p}{s} > \frac{r}{q}\)? Note that we can neither reduce this inequality by r/q, nor cross-multiply because we don't know signs of the variables, thus don't know whether we should flip the sign of the inequality (recall that we must flip the sign of an inequality when multiplying/reducing by a negative value).

(1) p > s. Not sufficient: we know nothing about r and q.

(2) rq > 0. This implies that r/q is also greater than 0, so we can reduce by it and the question becomes: is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)? We don't know that. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) The question became "is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)?" and (1) says that p > s, which is clearly insufficient to answer that. Not sufficient.

Answer: E.

Hope it's clear.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Sep 2018
Posts: 41
Own Kudos [?]: 54 [0]
Given Kudos: 72
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
IF we solve the inequality pr/qs >rq by taking r/q to LHS

we get two solutions
either r/q>0 & P/s >1 or r/q<0 and P/s <1

Statement 1 says P/s can be greater than 1 or can be less than 1

statement two on solving says that r/q is definitely greater than 0

when we combines stmt 1 and 2 don't we get
r/q>0 & P/s >1
or R/q >0 & P/s <1

out of these the first one is a definite solution for our ineuality in question

Pls tell me what am i doing wrong ?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Sep 2018
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 383 [0]
Given Kudos: 51
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Investment Banking)
Send PM
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
Bunuel wrote:
Aurion wrote:
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q?

(1) p > s
(2) rq > 0


(2) rq > 0. This implies that r/q is also greater than 0, so we can reduce by it and the question becomes: is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)? We don't know that. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) The question became "is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)?" and (1) says that p > s, which is clearly insufficient to answer that. Not sufficient.

Answer: E.

Hope it's clear.


This may be a ridiculous question, and I'm sure I'm overlooking something glaringly obvious, but:

rq>0 tells us both r and q are positive or negative.

So, p/s*r/q>r/q is divided by "r/q", should it not result in p/s>1?

I'm unable to figure out how p/s>0.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 1185
Own Kudos [?]: 2519 [0]
Given Kudos: 459
Location: India
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
NCRanjan wrote:
IF we solve the inequality pr/qs >rq by taking r/q to LHS

we get two solutions
either r/q>0 & P/s >1 or r/q<0 and P/s <1

Statement 1 says P/s can be greater than 1 or can be less than 1

statement two on solving says that r/q is definitely greater than 0

when we combines stmt 1 and 2 don't we get
r/q>0 & P/s >1
or R/q >0 & P/s <1

out of these the first one is a definite solution for our ineuality in question

Pls tell me what am i doing wrong ?



Hello

Few things which are probably not right here:

First, you are assuming pr/qs > r/q to be already true, thats why you have already started solving this inequality in your solution. This is NOT to be assumed to be true, infact this is what has to be determined whether its true or not.

Second, from (1) you are assuming p/s > 1. We are NOT given that p/s > 1, rather we are given that p > s. You have divided this given inequality on both sides by 's', without knowing the sign of s (positive or negative). We cannot do that, or we have to take both the cases (one case where s > 0 and another case where s < 0).
Retired Moderator
Joined: 22 Aug 2013
Posts: 1185
Own Kudos [?]: 2519 [0]
Given Kudos: 459
Location: India
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
shaarang wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
Aurion wrote:
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q?

(1) p > s
(2) rq > 0


(2) rq > 0. This implies that r/q is also greater than 0, so we can reduce by it and the question becomes: is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)? We don't know that. Not sufficient.

(1)+(2) The question became "is \(\frac{p}{s} >0\)?" and (1) says that p > s, which is clearly insufficient to answer that. Not sufficient.

Answer: E.

Hope it's clear.


This may be a ridiculous question, and I'm sure I'm overlooking something glaringly obvious, but:

rq>0 tells us both r and q are positive or negative.

So, p/s*r/q>r/q is divided by "r/q", should it not result in p/s>1?

I'm unable to figure out how p/s>0.



Hello

What you have done to conclude that p/s > 1 is correct, mathematically. BUT - you have already started working with the inequality pr/sq > r/q; meaning you have already assumed it to be true.

This is NOT given, this is something we have to determine whether its true or not, so we cannot start working with it the way you have done here.

Or maybe I am missing something which you would want to explain.

Also what is your confusion with p/s > 0, I dont understand that query of yours.
Director
Director
Joined: 21 Jun 2017
Posts: 637
Own Kudos [?]: 532 [0]
Given Kudos: 4092
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 620 Q47 V30
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
GPA: 3.1
WE:Corporate Finance (Non-Profit and Government)
Send PM
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
reduced the expression to (r/q)[(p-s)/s]
So is (r/q)[(p-s)/s] > 0 ?
1. Nothing about r/q or s Insuff
2. Nothing about p-s or s Insuff
Combining 1 and 2
Still nothing about sign of s.
Hence E
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2018
Posts: 54
Own Kudos [?]: 62 [0]
Given Kudos: 56
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
I went with thinking as the weights of p q r s

1. p>s---- doesnt tell us any thing about the weights of r and q... maybe r is less than q, which gives different answers for pr>qs
2. rq>0---- so either both r and q are positive or negative, again nothing on the weights of these numbers.

Even together, the weights of r and q are not known Hence, E.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Sep 2018
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 383 [0]
Given Kudos: 51
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Investment Banking)
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
Quote:
Hello

What you have done to conclude that p/s > 1 is correct, mathematically. BUT - you have already started working with the inequality pr/sq > r/q; meaning you have already assumed it to be true.

This is NOT given, this is something we have to determine whether its true or not, so we cannot start working with it the way you have done here.

Or maybe I am missing something which you would want to explain.

Also what is your confusion with p/s > 0, I dont understand that query of yours.


Ah, shoot. I knew it was something stupid. Thanks for clearing that up! :)
Manager
Manager
Joined: 20 Aug 2018
Posts: 182
Own Kudos [?]: 35 [0]
Given Kudos: 297
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V28
GMAT 2: 610 Q47 V27
GPA: 3.42
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
Aurion wrote:
If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q?

(1) p > s
(2) rq > 0

Dear Experts, kindly help me with the above problem. My pick was C, but it's incorrect.
pr/qs>r/q =>pqr >rqs => qr(p-s)>0. So i picked C. I guess i am missing something here. Request your help.



Dear Expert/any kind soul,
My solution is as follows and I have not been able to see why E is the answer even after reading the existing posts. Please help to explain.

We need to find if the following is true-
pr/qs > r/q ?
r/q ( p/s - 1 ) > 0 ?
r/q > 0 ? AND p/s > 1 ?

When we combine, we get both the conditions above, so Op. C is the answer.
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 33141
Own Kudos [?]: 829 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
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.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: If p, q, r, and s are non-zero numbers, is pr/qs > r/q? [#permalink]
Moderator:
Math Expert
93373 posts