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

 It is currently 22 Apr 2019, 23:30

### 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

# Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 211
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2008, 11:12
9
46
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

27% (02:00) correct 73% (02:14) wrong based on 1111 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Project CR Butler:Day 43:Critical Reasoning (CR1)

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9132
Location: Pune, India
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 12:10
14
1
5
puma wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously.
When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?'

Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously."
What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight].

Anyway, let's go on to the options.
Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant.

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
No relevance to the simultaneous provision.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously."

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date.

_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 292
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2010, 16:30
13
C is Correct

Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.
The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that
(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty - No issues with this as the treaty doesn't give any specific deadlines. Hence postponement is not an open item

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required - The stem clearly states that each country is bound a specific action and hence this makes this point invalid.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance - Correct. Reason, treaty has nothing about the clause if a certain country is not able to do the action due to some excuse, what should the dependent country do? Hence all the countries would keep on waiting for the notification.

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
Nope, the treaty talks about the completion of action triggers the next. Hence initiation of one action need not be notified. It's the closure of action which should be notified.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete[/quote]
Again, deadline is not an issue.
_________________
Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!!

|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|

~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~
##### General Discussion
Manager
Affiliations: Beta Gamma Sigma
Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Posts: 195
Schools: Harvard, Penn, Maryland
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Aug 2008, 17:46
9
2
couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

Director
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 774
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Aug 2008, 18:43
1
B
Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 211
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Aug 2008, 20:00
puma wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simuptaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simuptaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

a) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty

b) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required

c) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance

d) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action

e) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

C seems like the only answer that would satisfy this weird treaty. Each country will wait for the other six to complete the action and notify it. This will never happen.
Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 10
Location: Research Triangle Park, NC
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Aug 2008, 20:22
I think "C" is right, too.

It seems that there is no mechanism to communicate the start. Although there is a mechanism to communicate completion and a fixed date on which the actions must be performed.

Sound right?

cP
_________________
Just a few electrons short of a full cloud...
Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 146
Location: India
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2010, 09:42
1
4
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.
The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that
(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete
_________________
Cheers,
SD
Tuck School Moderator
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Posts: 271
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools: Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2010, 14:32
maybe C?

I do not have to comply to treaty unless other countries do the same. But how can I know that? Treaty specifies that the notification is to be sent only after completion of the action. It's most probable that everyone will simply wait for others to take action
Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 146
Location: India
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2010, 14:37
I actually I could not solve it. OA is

Can you explain.
_________________
Cheers,
SD
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 720
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Apr 2010, 04:56
I couldnt understand this stimulus as no conclusion is present.
In the end it asked for open threads and I chose E.
As per E -
there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete.

If one country didnt complete the action onbefore time then it wouldnt intimate other countries and similarly there is slippage in other countries date.

SudiptoGmat wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.
The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that
(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete

_________________
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 366
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 06:47
If each country has to wait for the others to complete their tasks first and then send this particular country the Task completion signal, then there is always the possibility that each of the countries is kept waiting for the signals from others.In this way none of the countries will have done its task,and will have the excuse that it did not receive the signal from the others.
Hence C.
It seems as if D is a paraphrase of the stimulus .
Any good reason to eliminate D.
_________________
My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Manager
Status: I rest, I rust.
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 98
Schools: ISB - Co 2013
WE 1: IT Professional since 2006
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 08:15
dk94588 wrote:
couldn't be D, the actions were "conditional on simuptaneous (I'm assuming simultaneous) action taken by the other countries," hence, all the countries would comply at the same time and the start signal for one is the start signal for all of them. I'm going with C, because if one country does not comply, then the other six countries have "well-founded excuses, based on the provision, for their own lack of compliance." meaning that if one doesn't pull the trigger the other six don't have to, becuase the actions are conditional on the simultaneous action of the other six countries in the treaty, which is one possibility that "the simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open."

I thought along the similar lines and decided that for any country to start the action, that country must know that others have atleast initiated (if not finished) their part of the bargain too. Or else all the countries might keep waiting indefinetly (software professionals would remember something similar from Pressman's Software engineering book)

But now that you put it the way you do, I am of the opinion that C expresses it better.
_________________
Respect,
Vaibhav

PS: Correct me if I am wrong.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 366
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 12:33
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
puma wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.

Read the question first: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

Now read the stimulus and focus on what the simultaneous action provision is. It is that each of them needs to carry out certain actions on a fixed date simultaneously.
When I read this, a thought occurs to me. 'Who starts?'

Think of it this way, there are 7 people standing in a line. I say, "You all have to run simultaneously."
What do you think could be an issue? Each person could stand there waiting for someone to start because they have to run [highlight]simultaneously[/highlight].

Anyway, let's go on to the options.
Option (A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with this possibility. These terms of the treaty, if they do exist, are irrelevant.

(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required.
No relevance to the simultaneous provision.

(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance.
Yes, it does leave open this possibility. Each country might have a well-founded excuse which is "We didn't see others taking action, so we didn't either because we had to take actions simultaneously."

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.
Read this option along with the question stem: The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action. And anyway, the simultaneous action provision specified that all the countries have to act simultaneously. It did not leave open the possibility that one country could initiate after receiving completion signal from another.

(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be compete.
The simultaneous provision has nothing to do with ambiguity with respect to end date.

karishma dont u think D is a paraphrase of the stimulus
_________________
My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9132
Location: Pune, India
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 13:31
4
mundasingh123 wrote:

karishma dont u think D is a paraphrase of the stimulus

Actually, I think the stimulus and option (D) say different things.

Stimulus says: All 7 had to perform specified actions on a fixed date simultaneously. Each country was to notify six others when it had completed its action.

(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action.

D says that one country initiated its actions only after it received a signal from other countries that they had completed their actions. This is against the simultaneous specification of the treaty mentioned in the stimulus.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 109
Location: So. CA
WE 1: 2 IT
WE 2: 4 Software Analyst
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Nov 2010, 23:45
man i fell for choice (D) too, but after reading Karishma's explanation, i have a better understanding now... +1 to you.
Manager
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 52
Location: India
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2010, 05:43
A.
Though there is a fixed time when each action has to start, it is conditional on the actions of other countries and hence a

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 163
Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V31
GPA: 3
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Jan 2011, 09:56
I narrowed the choices down to C and D.

On further analysis, I thought C is the best. In fact, it's the only one that really makes sense. D is simply paraphrasing the initial statement.
_________________
petrifiedbutstanding
Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2010
Posts: 144
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2011, 22:33
C is the only option that can go against the treaty.

all other options are well covered in the treaty

+1 for C
Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 225
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Other)
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2012, 01:26
ykaiim wrote:
I couldnt understand this stimulus as no conclusion is present.
In the end it asked for open threads and I chose E.
As per E -
there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete.

If one country didnt complete the action onbefore time then it wouldnt intimate other countries and similarly there is slippage in other countries date.

SudiptoGmat wrote:
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.
The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that
(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete

Ditto the same rreasoning I got and picked E ... actually C & E both kind of a probable one's ...
_________________
My GMAT Journey 540->680->730!

~ When the going gets tough, the Tough gets going!
Re: Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to   [#permalink] 09 Apr 2012, 01:26

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 37 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by