It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 22:43

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

OG - Since it has become known that several

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

6 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Posts: 247

Kudos [?]: 472 [6], given: 29

OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Aug 2009, 15:05
6
This post received
KUDOS
23
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

42% (01:50) correct 58% (01:40) wrong based on 3985 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Source : Official Guide 2017


Question : CR 646
Page : 540

Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced-impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Similar question: LINK
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Please give kudos if you enjoy the explanations that I have given. Thanks :)

Kudos [?]: 472 [6], given: 29

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 101

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 8

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Aug 2009, 18:40
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
perfectstranger wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's ' top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced-impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Other type of this question exists but this is another version. Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be appreciated with kudos :)) . OA after explanations.


Answer is A. Conclusion is that the rumours are false, first statement stays as a support to the conclusion however the second bold statement questions the support

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 8

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2009
Posts: 305

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 13

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Aug 2009, 23:31
Either A or B.

The first bold statement suports the intermediate conclusion made by the People that bank is safe. While the second bold statement preceeded by "Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic" contradicts the previous conclusion of the people.

IMO B

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 13

7 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 314

Kudos [?]: 392 [7], given: 9

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2009, 00:05
7
This post received
KUDOS
I also think that the answer should be A. Here's my line of reasoning


Premise 1: several of a bank's ' top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
Sub-conclusion: the bank's depositors have been greatly relieved

Premise 2: top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness
Sub-conclusion: those worrisome rumors must be false

conclusion and MP: Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic
Premise 3 that supports the main conclusion: corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health

IMO the main point is that the reasoning is not good. So what the argument seeks to establish is that the bank's depositors wrongly assumed that several top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank's financial soundness

taking a look at the answer choices

A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

This seems to fit with the structure of the passage. The first bold face statement support the conclusion that top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank

B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
The second bold face statement is not a conclusion, so we can rule this one out.

C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion
second is not a conclusion but rather a premise. We can rule out this one as well.

D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

What the argument seeks to explain is that bank's depositors wrongly drew their conclusion and this is not mentioned in the first bold statement.

E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Same reasoning as in D.

Kudos [?]: 392 [7], given: 9

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 32

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2009, 00:48
i go with D.

1st point: Buying of shares >> bank is strong
2nd point: buying of shares >> dispels negative rumors.
Conclusion: Reasoning is overly optimistic.

1st BF: describes a situation in question, with 1st and 2nd point as possible contributing reasons.

2nd BF: is 2nd point (counters 1st point) to support the Conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 32

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: ==GMAT Ninja==
Joined: 08 Jan 2011
Posts: 241

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 46

Schools: ISB, IIMA ,SP Jain , XLRI
WE 1: Aditya Birla Group (sales)
WE 2: Saint Gobain Group (sales)
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jun 2011, 00:51
mikeCoolBoy wrote:
I also think that the answer should be A. Here's my line of reasoning


Premise 1: several of a bank's ' top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
Sub-conclusion: the bank's depositors have been greatly relieved

Premise 2: top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness
Sub-conclusion: those worrisome rumors must be false

conclusion and MP: Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic
Premise 3 that supports the main conclusion: corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health

IMO the main point is that the reasoning is not good. So what the argument seeks to establish is that the bank's depositors wrongly assumed that several top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank's financial soundness

taking a look at the answer choices

A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

This seems to fit with the structure of the passage. The first bold face statement support the conclusion that top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank

B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
The second bold face statement is not a conclusion, so we can rule this one out.

C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion
second is not a conclusion but rather a premise. We can rule out this one as well.

D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

What the argument seeks to explain is that bank's depositors wrongly drew their conclusion and this is not mentioned in the first bold statement.

E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Same reasoning as in D.


You cracked it man
and this reflects how you would have gotten a 730 :) :)
_________________

WarLocK
_____________________________________________________________________________
The War is oNNNNNNNNNNNNN for 720+
see my Test exp here http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-test-experience-111610.html
do not hesitate me giving kudos if you like my post. :)

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 46

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 53

Kudos [?]: 1204 [2], given: 0

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2012, 11:13
2
This post received
KUDOS
65
This post was
BOOKMARKED

Source : Official Guide 2017


Question : CR 646
Page : 540


Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Last edited by betterscore on 20 Jul 2012, 13:41, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 1204 [2], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 355

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 46

Location: US
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2012, 15:02
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
betterscore wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.


My Answer is (A) because the 2nd bold face is contrary statement to the conclusion, which the argument is trying to establish.
_________________

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you do TODAY is important because you're exchanging a day of your life for it!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Last edited by Capricorn369 on 23 Jul 2012, 13:28, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 46

1 KUDOS received
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1218

Kudos [?]: 1659 [1], given: 116

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Premium Member
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2012, 01:50
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
betterscore wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.


Seems like D to me.

The reasoning is that:

The conclusion of the argument is that the reasoning is over optimistic. So A, B & C can be eliminated. And between D & E, D seems to be the right answer.

Can someone provide explanation as to how A is the right answer.??
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Kudos [?]: 1659 [1], given: 116

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 4

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2012, 04:26
2
This post received
KUDOS
I chose (D) but why not (A)?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting "a conclusion"; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

the first boldface is an explanation why bank's depositors are relieved and this could be thought as supporting "a conclusion" that they are relieved. The second is an alternative reason why they should not be so relieved (reason why they might be thought to be "overoptimistic"), therefore it is questioning the support.

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 4

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

Schools: Booth '15
CAT Tests
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2012, 08:31
I too chose D. But there are two conclusions here for sure. For overall conclusion of "overoptimistic" option D seems right but for intermediate conclusion A seem right.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 82

Kudos [?]: 49 [1], given: 21

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 12:13
1
This post received
KUDOS
I found A as correct answer

Reasoning-->Top executive of bank buys share--> why because he thinks bank is financially sound
top executive of corporate companies buys share-->to dispel negative rumors about company health
Second boldface call first boldface into question --- what if top bank executive is also acting like a corporate company executive ?

Kudos [?]: 49 [1], given: 21

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

Schools: Booth '15
CAT Tests
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 12:29
Guess you misunderstood. The second bold face is a general statement about corporate executives and applies to bank's executives as well.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

3 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 7 [3], given: 4

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 17:28
3
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
tried this question for the second time and came up with (A) as the answer.

as for choice (D):
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
=> the argument as a whole is not seeking to explain the first boldface, namely several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
but instead is trying to refute the claim that rumors about impending financial collapse of the bank must be false.

Kudos [?]: 7 [3], given: 4

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 146

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 51

Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: UCLA (Anderson) - Class of 2014
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V35
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 20:31
aramisLab wrote:
tried this question for the second time and came up with (A) as the answer.

as for choice (D):
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
=> the argument as a whole is not seeking to explain the first boldface, namely several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
but instead is trying to refute the claim that rumors about impending financial collapse of the bank must be false.


This is a tough question. I agree with you on your reasoning to choose D. The second part doesn't try to establish an explanation, it is trying to refute the previous claim.

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 51

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 146

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 51

Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: UCLA (Anderson) - Class of 2014
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V35
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 21:08
divyakesharwani wrote:
Guess you misunderstood. The second bold face is a general statement about corporate executives and applies to bank's executives as well.


I don't think that the second boldface is a general statement. Rather, it tries to refute the first claim. I think it is a better idea to put the second boldface into the whole context of the question stem.

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 51

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 1031 [0], given: 136

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Aug 2012, 09:26
Hi,
Can someone pls clarify my below doubts

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

I know that the second bold face statement is a premise used in support of the main conclusion of the argument that the author seeks to establish i.e. "The reasoning given to dispel fears might be over optimistic". But how does second statement i.e colored one in question stem relates to my reasoning.

Also, can someone please explain in detail as to why choice D is wrong.
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Kudos [?]: 1031 [0], given: 136

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 21 [1], given: 7

Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.4
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Aug 2012, 10:01
1
This post received
KUDOS
D is wrong because the second DOESN'T give the explanation that the argument seeks to establish. The second gives a reason for questioning that support

Kudos [?]: 21 [1], given: 7

7 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 343

Kudos [?]: 293 [7], given: 27

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2012, 09:47
7
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Clear A , for boldface questions I found to go through the following steps -->

1) Identify the main conclusion of the passage , then see what part does bold face plays in the conclusion.
2) Identify the tone of the parts , generally its easy to discard some options on this basis.
Example -->
several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank and
corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health

These two are opposite in tones so one can decide on that. In this question all the answer choices except A and B have the two parts in same tone.

Now among A and B , B states for second part that its the main conclusion which it is not cause the main conclusion is

since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false

Hence A prevails
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Kudos [?]: 293 [7], given: 27

Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7674

Kudos [?]: 17354 [4], given: 232

Location: Pune, India
Re: OG - Since it has become known that several [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2012, 23:18
4
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
betterscore wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.


Responding to a pm:

Conclusion of the argument: Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic

First statement: several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, - evidence supporting 'depositors have been greatly relieved'

Second statement: corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors - evidence supporting 'reasoning is overoptimistic'. This sentence questions the evidence of the first sentence. So, executives are buying shares in their own bank - well, they have been known to do that. It is a calculated step.

So the first bold sentence gives support to the conclusion that investors are relieved. But the second bold sentence questions this support and hence gives support to 'they probably shouldn't be relieved'.

As for (D), I don't think it makes much sense to me at all.

Let's look at it in detail:

The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain - the entire argument is explaining a circumstance. The first bold statement itself is not doing it. It only explains why people are relieved - the conclusion which the argument questions.

the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish. - the explanation that the argument would establish would be the conclusion endorsed by the argument. The second statement is a premise, not a conclusion endorsed by the argument.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17354 [4], given: 232

Re: OG - Since it has become known that several   [#permalink] 13 Aug 2012, 23:18

Go to page    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 69 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

OG - Since it has become known that several

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.