GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 18 Sep 2018, 06:42

### 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

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

# M02-03

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 49204

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2014, 00:16
1
1
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

72% (00:35) correct 28% (00:43) wrong based on 153 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

If a website registered 810 new members in June, how many of the new, registered members were from USA?

(1) In June, the ratio of new members from USA, Europe and Asia was 4:3:2 respectively.

(2) In June, none of the members were from locations other than USA, Europe and Asia.

_________________
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 49204

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2014, 00:17
Official Solution:

(1) In June, the ratio of new members from USA, Europe and Asia was 4:3:2 respectively. We don't know whether there were new members from some other parts of the world (Africa for example). Not sufficient.

(2) In June, none of the members were from locations other than USA, Europe and Asia. Not sufficient on its own.

(1)+(2) From (2) we know that all 810 new members were from USA, Europe and Asia and (1) gives their ratio 4:3:2. So, $$4x+3x+2x=810$$ giving $$x=90$$, hence $$\text{USA}=4x=4*90=360$$. Sufficient.

_________________
Intern
Joined: 19 Aug 2014
Posts: 4

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2015, 10:20
I think this question is poor and not helpful.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 49204

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2015, 10:24
Ivan90 wrote:
I think this question is poor and not helpful.

Would you mind to elaborate a bit? Thank you.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2015
Posts: 121

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2015, 00:53
1
I would presume Ivan90 means that it is very easy to grasp the idea, the only moment which might be looking like a "trap" is the fact that it is not mentioned that people who registered were only from the USA, Europe or Asia. But its easily discovered when you read the second statement.

Basically the way an inexperienced person would approach the question would be like this.
step 1 - ok, #1 works fine, seems sufficient, easy equation: 4x + 3x + 2x = 810, nothing special
step 2 - then you read statement #2 and realise that "oh wait, there was indeed nothing about people only being from USA, Europe and Asia, gotta rethink #1 and realise that there is another variable that makes #1 insufficient (4x + 3x +2x + "others" = 810) and a combination of #1 and #2 (nullifying that variable "others") sufficient.

Thats why this question is rather poor, but I'd say it is somewhat helpful in a way that you notice thise little quirks aka "but nothing was mentioned about other countries"
Intern
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 1

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2015, 20:49
Well said, Z. I had no inclination that other countries would have been considered until reading the second statement. I think this question should be scrapped.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 49204

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2015, 09:17
Zhenek wrote:
I would presume Ivan90 means that it is very easy to grasp the idea, the only moment which might be looking like a "trap" is the fact that it is not mentioned that people who registered were only from the USA, Europe or Asia. But its easily discovered when you read the second statement.

Basically the way an inexperienced person would approach the question would be like this.
step 1 - ok, #1 works fine, seems sufficient, easy equation: 4x + 3x + 2x = 810, nothing special
step 2 - then you read statement #2 and realise that "oh wait, there was indeed nothing about people only being from USA, Europe and Asia, gotta rethink #1 and realise that there is another variable that makes #1 insufficient (4x + 3x +2x + "others" = 810) and a combination of #1 and #2 (nullifying that variable "others") sufficient.

Thats why this question is rather poor, but I'd say it is somewhat helpful in a way that you notice thise little quirks aka "but nothing was mentioned about other countries"

Even without statement (2) we cannot assume that there are no people from other parts of the world.
_________________
Director
Joined: 21 May 2013
Posts: 651

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2015, 12:00
Bunuel wrote:
Zhenek wrote:
I would presume Ivan90 means that it is very easy to grasp the idea, the only moment which might be looking like a "trap" is the fact that it is not mentioned that people who registered were only from the USA, Europe or Asia. But its easily discovered when you read the second statement.

Basically the way an inexperienced person would approach the question would be like this.
step 1 - ok, #1 works fine, seems sufficient, easy equation: 4x + 3x + 2x = 810, nothing special
step 2 - then you read statement #2 and realise that "oh wait, there was indeed nothing about people only being from USA, Europe and Asia, gotta rethink #1 and realise that there is another variable that makes #1 insufficient (4x + 3x +2x + "others" = 810) and a combination of #1 and #2 (nullifying that variable "others") sufficient.

Thats why this question is rather poor, but I'd say it is somewhat helpful in a way that you notice thise little quirks aka "but nothing was mentioned about other countries"

Even without statement (2) we cannot assume that there are no people from other parts of the world.

Hi Bunuel,

I understand your intent here to have questions with such traps but agreeing with what others have said above, I think this is not a GMAT like question.
Intern
Joined: 08 Aug 2017
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2018, 13:11
I disagree, this is very much like a GMAT question. Although, the second option gives away the catch (that is why this is a 500 level question), this question reiterates the fact that sometimes statement 2 has hints that can connect the dots. We must keep this in mind. For example, sometimes I do not grasp a DS problem just by reading Statement 1, but when I read statement 2 I can get a hint as to which direction the question is leaning towards. I hope you guys get the gist of the point I am making.
Re: M02-03 &nbs [#permalink] 14 Apr 2018, 13:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# M02-03

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.