Author 
Message 
TAGS:

Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1457

Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Dec 2007, 15:22
Question Stats:
68% (00:59) correct 32% (01:08) wrong based on 681 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p? (1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's.
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/ Login.



Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 854

Answer is C. Right off the bat without doing any math.
Taken separately we don't know anything.
Taken together...
We know that their salaries grew further apart by $440. They started off in 1995 as $2,000 apart. That means the $440 increase must have come from the $2,000 difference.
440/2000 = P
(using a calculator to prove it)
440/2000 = 22% (or 2,440/2000 = 1.22)
10,000(1.22) = 12,200
12,000(1.22) = 14, 640
14,64012,200 = 2,440
50,000(1.22) = 61,000
52,000(1.22) = 63,440
63,44061,000 = 2,440
No need to do the math on the real test. Just realize that you know how much their salaries started and that if there is any change in the difference it must've come from the original difference in salary.
C it is.



Intern
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 38

Re: DS: Percentage Salary Increase [#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Dec 2007, 16:19
tarek99 wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's.
(2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's.
Please explain your answer
A insufficient
B Insufficient
Combining
From A,
In 1995
Janson's salary = J
Karen's salary = J+2000
In 1998
Janson's salary = J*0.p + J
Karen's salary = ((J+2000) * 0.p) + (J +2000)
Also, from B
((J+2000) * 0.p) + (J +2000) = (J*0.p + J) +2440
2000*0.p=440
Ans C
Whats the OA



Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 854

Not at all.
All we have to do is realize that a $2,000 difference grew to a $2,440 when multiplied by P. This makes for a 22% increase and the information holds true for any two numbers $2,000 apart.
500,000*1.22 = 610,000
502,000*1.22 = 612,440
2,000*1.22 = 2440
4,000*1.22 = 4880
answer is definitely C.



Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 854

tnguyen707 wrote: eschn3am wrote: Not at all.
All we have to do is realize that a $2,000 difference grew to a $2,440 when multiplied by P. This makes for a 22% increase and the information holds true for any two numbers $2,000 apart.
500,000*1.22 = 610,000 502,000*1.22 = 612,440
2,000*1.22 = 2440 4,000*1.22 = 4880
answer is definitely C. I tested this method, and it works. I still can't visualize it. Oh well, I guess whatever works!
Try thinking of it like this.
We know that in 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's
We know that in 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's
Between 1995 and 1998 each of their salaries increased by the same percentage (P)
If Jason makes $10,000 and Karen makes $12,000 then we know that Jason's 10K and Karen's first 10K each increased by the same amount. They would be dead even in 1998 if Karen didn't make $2,000 more.
This means that Karen's $2,000 had to increase by $440 (to get to $2,440) all on it's own. So what percentage increase do you need for $2,000 to become $2,440? this is your answer. and that's why you can choose C without doing any math.
I'm not the best with explanations, but I hope this helps somewhat.



VP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1457

OA is C. but the way i saw this, the difference of 440 didn't make any sense to me. I thought C is possible ONLY if the 2 people have the exact same salary from the beginning. but we don't even know that. a 5% increase on a salary of $10 will not yield the same as a salary of $100. that's why i picked E. both could yield different dollar amounts, but both have the same percentage increase. but after looking at the explanation, i guess if this works, then so be it. i never realised you could get to such an answer by only having the gaps between the 2 actually amounts. cool



SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2426

Re: DS: Percentage Salary Increase [#permalink]
Show Tags
12 Dec 2007, 21:32
tarek99 wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's.
Please explain your answer
1995: Janson's salary = j
Karen's salary = k
1998: Janson's salary = j (1+p)
Karen's salary = k (1+p)
1: in 1995, k = j + 2000
2: in 1998, k(1+p) = j (1+p) + 2440
togather: k(1+p) = j (1+p) + 2440
(j + 2000) (1+p) = j (1+p) + 2440
2000 + 2000p = 2440
p = (2440  2000)/2000
p = 22%



Intern
Affiliations: SPE
Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 8
Location: Copenhagen
Schools: Columbia, MIT, Harvard, LBS

Re: ds question [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Oct 2010, 03:13
C it is.
1) insuff. as info given: J + 2000 = K, and no time scale to relate to P. 2) insuff. as above
both  I assumed suff as I think we had enough data. solve the two equations: J + 2000 = k J + (J*P) + 2400 = k + (k*P)
P = 22%
Not sure if this is at all right. Please help



Manager
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 159

Re: ds question [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Oct 2010, 03:28
Both statements alone do not help, so we have to look at both statements together. In 1995: Ka = Ja + 2000 In 1998: Kb = Jb + 2400 Since Kb = Ka(1 + p/100), Ka(1 + p/100) = Ja(1 + p/100) + 2400 Substitute Ka (Ja + 2000)(1 + p/100) = Ja(1 + p/100) + 2400 solving we get p = 20% So the answer is C.
_________________
Give [highlight]KUDOS [/highlight] if you like my post.
Always do things which make you feel ALIVE!!!



Manager
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Posts: 201
Location: India
WE 1: 6 Year, Telecom(GSM)

Re: ds question [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Oct 2010, 03:36
satishreddy wrote: jasons salary and karen salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995, what is the value of p
1) in 1995 karens salary was $2000 greater than jasons 1) in 1998 karens salary was $2400 greater than jasons Combining these 2 statement we can get the value of p. Because 2000 would also have increased with the same percentage p. means, 2000 + 2000(p/100) = 2400 or p = (400* 100)/2000 = 20%. Answer is C. Consider KUDOS if u find this helpful to u .Thanks



Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 46047

Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Nov 2010, 07:25
anilnandyala wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's. Given: \(j_2=j_1(1+\frac{p}{100})\) and \(k_2=k_1(1+\frac{p}{100})\). Qurestion: \(p=?\) (1) \(k_1j_1=2,000\). Not sufficient to calculate \(p\). (2) \(k_2j_2=2440\). Not sufficient to calculate \(p\). (1)+(2) \(k_2j_2=2440=k_1(1+\frac{p}{100})j_1(1+\frac{p}{100})\) > \(2440=k_1(1+\frac{p}{100})j_1(1+\frac{p}{100})=(1+\frac{p}{100})(k_1j_1)=(1+\frac{p}{100})2,000\) > \(2440=(1+\frac{p}{100})2,000\). Sufficient to to calculate \(p\). Or another way: difference between their salaries increased by 24402000=440, which is 440/2000*100=22%, but difference increases proportionally with the salaries, so increase in salary is also 22%. Answer: C.
_________________
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



Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8097
Location: Pune, India

Re: jason's salary & karen's salary [#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Nov 2010, 17:59
Since question asks for the comparison between 1995 and 1998 salaries, a quick look at the statements will tell you that neither alone is sufficient. Now the question remains whether together they are sufficient. Let's analyze. In 1995: J salary  J; K salary  J + 2000 In 1998: (Their salaries are now p% greater) J salary J + p% of J; K salary (J + 2000) + p% of (J + 2000)= J + p% of J + 2000 + p% of 2000Compare the salaries in red. According to second statement, their difference is 2440. So we can say p% of 2000 = 440. On solving, we get p = 22
_________________
Karishma Veritas Prep  GMAT Instructor My Blog
Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199
Veritas Prep Reviews



Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 394
Location: Texas

Re: Janson salary [#permalink]
Show Tags
03 May 2011, 10:15
udaymathapati wrote: Note that both of their salary increase by same p percent. In 1995 let jason's and karen's salary be j and k resp. And in 1998, let that be j1 and k1. j1 = pj k1 = pk St 1 > in 1995, k = j+2000 Not sufficient doesn't provide any info about 1998 year. St 2> in 1998, k1 = j1+2440 Not sufficient doesn't provide any info about 1995 year. Both together, solve the equations  k1 = pk j1+2440 = p(j+2000) j1+2440 = j1+p2000 > p = 12.2 Answer is C



Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1472
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology

Re: jason's salary & karen's salary [#permalink]
Show Tags
03 May 2011, 21:42
J = (1+p/100)j K = (1+p/100)k (1) k = j + 2000 Not sufficient (2) K = J + 2440 Not Sufficient (1) + (2) J/K = j/k 1  2440/K = 1  2000/k => K/k = 2440/2000 Substituting this in above equation 2440/2000 = (1 + p)/100 Answer  C
_________________
Formula of Life > Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)
GMAT Club Premium Membership  big benefits and savings



Manager
Joined: 26 Feb 2013
Posts: 52
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)

Re: Percents : Jason's salary and karen's salary were P % [#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Apr 2013, 04:38
My answer is C In 1995 Jason's salary J. In 1998 it would be (1+p/100)*J In 1995 Karen's salary K. In 1998 it would be (1+p/100)*K Stmt 1 : K= J+2000 in 1995. We dont know about either of their salaries in 1998. Hence insufficient
Stmt 2: (1+p/100)K=(1+p/100)J + 2440. We dont know the values of J and K . Hence insufficient.
combining. let (1+p/100)= a . a*(j+2000) = a*J +2440.
and we can solve for a or (1+p/100) and we can find the value of P.
Hope its clear.



Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 7

Re: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
13 May 2013, 13:03
In DS questions you can simply test whether you can find a percentage change from a percent change in differing values by picking values.
Say: A = 200 B = 100 Difference is 100.
Increase values by 10%:
A = 220 B = 110 Difference: 110. 110 is a 10% increase from the original difference, so this will also hold for the original values in the question stem.
C



Intern
Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Posts: 26

Re: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
03 Jul 2014, 19:12
tarek99 wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's. Here's how I did it. (1) 95 increased by p 98 Jason S Karen (S+2000) Not sufficient (2) 95 increased by p 98 Jason Y Karen Y+ 2 400 Not Suffictient. So combining: (S+2000)xP/1002440=SP/100 2000P/100=2440 20P=2440 P=2440/20 P=122 22% increase



Target Test Prep Representative
Status: Head GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Joined: 04 Mar 2011
Posts: 2570

Re: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Nov 2016, 08:07
tarek99 wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's. We are given that Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995, and we need to determine the value of p. We can let J = Janson's salary in 1995 and K = Karen's salary in 1995. Therefore, (1 + p/100)J is Jason’s salary in 1998 and (1 + p/100)K is Karen’s salary in 1998. Statement One Alone:In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Janson's. This means K = J + 2000. However, that is not enough information to determine the value of p. Statement one alone is not sufficient. We can eliminate answer choices A and D. Statement Two Alone:In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Janson's. Using the information in statement two, we can create the following equation: (1 + p/100)K = (1 + p/100)J + 2440 However, this is still not enough information to determine p. Statement two alone is not sufficient. We can eliminate answer choice B. Statements One and Two Together: From the two statements, we have the following: K = J + 2000 (1 + p/100)K = (1 + p/100)J + 2440 Let’s simplify the second equation: We can start by dividing both sides by (1 + p/100) and obtain: K = J + 2440/(1 + p/100) K – J = 2440/(1 + p/100) From our first equation, we know that K – J = 2,000. Thus, we can substitute 2,000 for K – J in our second equation and we have: 2000 = 2440/[(1 + p/100)] Since we know that we can determine p, we can stop here. The two statements together are sufficient. Answer: C
_________________
Jeffery Miller
Head of GMAT Instruction
GMAT Quant SelfStudy Course
500+ lessons 3000+ practice problems 800+ HD solutions



CEO
Joined: 12 Sep 2015
Posts: 2557
Location: Canada

Re: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent [#permalink]
Show Tags
13 Jan 2018, 07:28
tarek99 wrote: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995. What is the value of p?
(1) In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's. (2) In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's. Target question: What is the value of p?Given: Jason's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent greater in 1998 than in 1995.IMPORTANT: If my 1998 salary is p percent greater than my 1995 salary, then: 1998 salary = (1 + p/100)(1995 salary) For example, if my 1998 salary is 7 percent greater than my 1995 salary, then: 1998 salary = (1 + 7/100)(1995 salary) = 1.07(1995 salary) Let K = Karen's salary in 1995 Let J = Jason's salary in 1995 So, (1 + p/100)K = Karen's salary in 1998 And (1 + p/100)J = Jason's salary in 1998 Statement 1: In 1995 Karen's salary was $2,000 greater than Jason's So, we get K  J = 2000So there's no information about p, so we can't determine the value of pSince we cannot answer the target question with certainty, statement 1 is NOT SUFFICIENT Statement 2: In 1998 Karen's salary was $2,440 greater than Jason's We get: (1 + p/100)K  (1 + p/100)J = 2400 NOTICE that we can rewrite this as: (1 + p/100)(K  J) = 2400Since we cannot solve this equation for p, statement 2 is NOT SUFFICIENT Statements 1 and 2 combined From statement 1, we concluded that K  J = 2000From statement 2, we concluded that (1 + p/100)(K  J) = 2400Now take the second equation and replace (K  J) with 2000 to get: (1 + p/100)( 2000) = 2400 At this point, we need only recognize that we COULD solve this equation for p, but we're not going to, since this would waste valuable time on the timesensitive GMAT. Since we can answer the target question with certainty, the combined statements are SUFFICIENT Answer: Cheers, Brent
_________________
Brent Hanneson – Founder of gmatprepnow.com




Re: Janson's salary and Karen's salary were each p percent
[#permalink]
13 Jan 2018, 07:28






