A certain fruit stand sells only apples for $0.26 each, bananas for $0

Question

A certain fruit stand sells only apples for $0.26 each, bananas for $0.24 each, and cantaloupes for $0.65 each. Can Clark spend exactly $5.00 at the fruit stand buying fruit that he likes?

(1) Clark does not like bananas.
(2) Clark does not like cantaloupes.

Diwakar003 · Answer

Converting all the cost into cents for the ease of calculation. So cost of an Apple(A) - 26cents, a Banana(B)-24 cents, and a Cantaloupe(C) - 65 cents. Total amount Clark has is 500 cents.

(1) Clark does not like bananas - Assuming he has to buy Apples and Cantaloupes. nA+mC = 500, where n, and m are no. of Apples and Cantaloupes respectively. No combinations are possible so he cannot spend exactly 5$. So sufficient.

(2) Clark does not like cantaloupes - Assuming he has to buy Apples and Bananas. nA+mB=500. 10 Apples and 10 Bananas cost 260+240=500. So he can spend exactly 5$. - Sufficient

Hence the answer is D.

Cheers!

Mo2men · Answer

Dear Bunuel,

This question is flawed. We can reach the answer from each statement alone but each statement contradicts each other. When you reveal the answer, can you post the official answer by Veritas?

Thanks

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Mo2men , I'm happy to help. :-)

Here is my interpretation. Statement #1 : Clark does not like bananas . Does he like cantaloupes? Maybe or maybe not: we don't know. Does he like apples? Maybe or maybe not: we don't know. If he likes just cantaloupes, or just apples, or both cantaloupes & apples, then in any of those combinations, it's impossible to spend exactly $5.00. You see, both 26¢ and 65¢ are multiples of 13, and any combination of something times the first plus something times the second will still have to be divisible by 13. Since 500 is NOT divisible by 13, there's no way to combine apples & cantaloupes, separately or together, to get $5.00. Of course, if he doesn't like any of the three fruits, then he can't possibly spend the money on fruit he likes! Every scenario under this statement gives a resounding "NO" to the prompt statement. Because we can give a definitive answer, this statement, alone and by itself, is sufficient . Statement #2 : Clark does not like cantaloupes . How could anyone not love cantaloupes? They're delicious! :-)

Does he like bananas? Maybe or maybe not: we don't know. Does he like apples? Maybe or maybe not: we don't know. Consider these two scenarios (a) Clark likes both apples & bananas. One apples + one bananas = 50¢. Multiply this by ten: 10 apples & 10 bananas = $5.00 exactly. This gives a "yes" answer to the prompt. (b) Clark doesn't like bananas; he only like apples. No multiple of 26¢ can equal exactly $5.00. This gives a "no" answer to the prompt. If the question were " does he spend exactly $5.00 ," the answer would be no. But the exact prompt is " can he spend exactly $5.00? " Yes, scenario (a) clearly provides a right by which he can spend $5.00. We can answer "yes" to the prompt question. Because we can give a definitive answer, this statement, alone and by itself, is sufficient . Both statements sufficient. Answer = (D) . But, Mo2men , I believe you are right. Something is fishy here. The scenario that makes statement #2 work is explicitly prohibited by statement #1, so the statements together would not work. Even though we can get to an answer, this question doesn't have the deep logical coherence that an official question would have. It's always true in official DS questions, even questions that have answers of (A), (B), or (D), that all statements can be true as part of the answer scenario. I believe there is a design flaw in this question. Bunuel , what do you think? Mike :-)

AnthonyRitz · Answer

Aw, man, Mike, you're really busting our balls today. :roll:

We're gonna have to have a question-wording summit or something. (Feel free to PM me.) I wrote this question, and I don't really agree with the reading you're advancing. After all, in statement 2, he can do it *if* he likes apples and bananas. That's a condition separate from the one we're considering, and it isn't answered anywhere. You sort of reinterpreted the question in your response. You said but you left out the end of it. The full question reads "Can Clark spend exactly $5.00 at the fruit stand buying fruit that he likes ?" I mean, I can squint and see the reading "it's possible, since it's possible he likes those fruits and it's possible to make that dollar amount with those fruits," but the layering of conditions makes it feel wrong. It would render basically any "can" statement immediately sufficient no matter what. And especially given that there's nothing inherently self-contradictory about the facts here, and given that (1) gives NO, it seems weird to stretch so far to make (2) from a "maybe" into a "yes." We worked a lot on this wording, and "does" isn't better since of course then it's just E (and quite boring) -- there's no information about what Clark actually does here. Here's the official solution: So, my personal take on the wording is that it's fine and GMAT-appropriate. But I'll certainly consider it further, discuss it with my boss, and see what other instructors think, and if it's unduly confusing we'll find a way to edit. We certainly don't want to mislead anyone with ambiguous wording! Again, feel free to PM me to discuss. P.s. The first definition of "can" in the dictionary is "to be able." If the question said "Is Clark able to...?" would that change your mind?

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear AnthonyRitz , My brilliant colleague, see my private email for a long philosophical rant about this question. :-)

With deep respect, Mike McGarry :-)

AnthonyRitz · Answer

Thanks Mike. You're quite the shameless flatterer.

I'm discussing this wording with my boss, and I'm not sure whether we'll change it or not, but I'm definitely taking your interpretation into account. I'd also still love to see what Bunuel thinks. If we do change it, I'll update here. Regardless of the outcome, I really appreciate the time and insight you've devoted to this subject. I would have responded directly, by the way, but some of us don't accept private messages here.

BillyZ · Answer

TRICKY QUESTION .

Official solution from Veritas Prep.

At the outset, we don’t know what kinds of fruit Clark likes, so there’s no way to determine whether he can spend  $5.00  on fruit that he likes. And it’s important to note that neither additional premise ever establishes any kind of fruit that Clark actually does like. It will not be possible at any point to prove that Clark can spend exactly  $5.00  on fruit that he likes, so the only way in which sufficiency might be obtained is to prove that Clark in fact cannot spend exactly  $5.00  on fruit that he likes.

If, as statement (1) establishes, Clark does not like bananas, then the only way that he can spend  $5.00  on fruit that he likes is if he likes apples and/or cantaloupes and if the equation  26a+65c=500  has at least one solution for non-negative integers  a  and  c . Note, however, that both  26  and  65  are multiples of  13 . Factoring gives

13(2a+5c)=500

The left side is a multiple of  13 , but the right side is not. But this is impossible for any non-negative integers  a  and  c , so Clark definitely cannot spend exactly  $5.00  buying fruit that he likes. Statement 1 is  sufficient .

Statement 2 establishes that Clark does not like cantaloupes. In order for Clark to spend exactly $5.00 on fruit that he likes, he would have to like apples and/or bananas, and the equation  26a+24b=500  would have to have at least one solution for non-negative integers  a  and  b . We can reduce the equation slightly by dividing through by  2 . The result is

13a+12b=250

Since  a ,  b , and  c  must be non-negative integers, this is what’s known as a  linear Diophantine equation . Students who have studied such equations may be aware that the linear Diophantine equation  Mx+Ny=Q  will always have  at least one non-negative integer solution   (x,y)  provided that the greatest common divisor of  M  and  N  is  1  and that  Q>MN–M–N . Both conditions are met here, so a solution exists. Other students may wish to apply a bit of trial and error to actually determine such a solution. Note that  25  can be obtained as  13∗1+12∗1 . Thus  250  can be expressed as  13∗10+12∗10 , and one solution (in fact the only one) is for Clark to buy  10  apples and  10  bananas.

Either way, since Clark may or may not like apples and bananas, he may or may not be able to spend exactly  $5.00  in this manner, and statement  2  is  insufficient .

So, how does Clark like them apples? It doesn’t really matter.

The answer is  A .

gaurav9024 · Answer

At the outset, we don’t know what kinds of fruit Clark likes, so there’s no way to determine whether he can spend $5.00 on fruit that he likes. And it’s important to note that neither additional premise ever establishes any kind of fruit that Clark actually does like. It will not be possible at any point to prove that Clark can spend exactly $5.00 on fruit that he likes, so the only way in which sufficiency might be obtained is to prove that Clark in fact cannot spend exactly $5.00 on fruit that he likes.

If, as statement (1) establishes, Clark does not like bananas, then the only way that he can spend $5.00 on fruit that he likes is if he likes apples and/or cantaloupes and if the equation 
26a+65c=500
 has at least one solution for non-negative integers 
a
 and 
c
. Note, however, that both 
26
 and 
65
 are multiples of 
13
. Factoring gives

13(2a+5c)=500

The left side is a multiple of 
13
, but the right side is not. But this is impossible for any non-negative integers 
a
 and 
c
, so Clark definitely cannot spend exactly $5.00 buying fruit that he likes. Statement 1 is sufficient.

Statement 2 establishes that Clark does not like cantaloupes. In order for Clark to spend exactly $5.00 on fruit that he likes, he would have to like apples and/or bananas, and the equation 
26a+24b=500
 would have to have at least one solution for non-negative integers 
a
 and 
b
. We can reduce the equation slightly by dividing through by 
2
. The result is

13a+12b=250

Since 
a
, 
b
, and 
c
 must be non-negative integers, this is what’s known as a linear Diophantine equation. Students who have studied such equations may be aware that the linear Diophantine equation 
Mx+Ny=Q
 will always have at least one non-negative integer solution 
(x,y)
 provided that the greatest common divisor of 
M
 and 
N
 is 
1
 and that 
Q>MN–M–N
. Both conditions are met here, so a solution exists.

Other students may wish to apply a bit of trial and error to actually determine such a solution. Note that 
25
 can be obtained as 
13∗1+12∗1
. Thus 
250
 can be expressed as 
13∗10+12∗10
, and one solution (in fact the only one) is for Clark to buy 
10
 apples and 
10
 bananas.

Either way, since Clark may or may not like apples and bananas, he may or may not be able to spend exactly $5.00 in this manner, and statement 2 is insufficient.

So, how does Clark like them apples? It doesn’t really matter. The answer is A.

TarunKumar1234 · Answer

A certain fruit stand sells only apples for $0.26 each, bananas for $0.24 each, and cantaloupes for $0.65 each. Can Clark spend exactly $5.00 at the fruit stand buying fruit that he likes?

Given, 26A + 24B + 65C = 500

Stat1: 1 Clark does not like bananas.
now, 26A + 65C = 500, 13* (2A+5C)= 500, but 500 is never divisible by 13. Hence, Clark will force to get some Bananas. Now, He has 3 fruits and he can decide, which one to like or not. Sufficient.

Stat2: Clark does not like cantaloupes.
26A + 24B = 500, Now, 13A + 12B = 250, so, 13*12= 156<250 (Linear Diophantine Equation), so there will one or two solutions for A and B. So, without cantaloupes, Clark will spend 500 cents. What if he likes cantaloupes or not. So, Clark must have all fruits available. In this case not. Not sufficient.

So, I think A.

Bambi2021 · Answer

I thought like this:

Must Clark buy any of the fruits?

Multiples of bananas : 24-48-72-96- 120 ...240...360
Multiples of apples : 26-52-78-104- 130 ...260...390
Multiples of cantaloupes: 65- 130 ...260...290

The important multiples are 120, 130, 130, respectively. Clark obviously need to buy bananas to be able to reach exactly 250 (and so 5 dollars).

Statement (1) is therefore sufficient. 
Statement (2) is therefore not sufficient. Maybe he buys cantaloupes to his mother, or maybe he doesnt.

Edit: Hmm, I see now why this is flawed. He must always buy bananas, and thats a fruit he does not like. So taken statement (2) we can still answer the question.

Correct answer must be D.

Gladiator59 · Answer

I found the wording to be weird

DangPham9625 · Answer

A is the answer because:
if (1) is true: Clark def cannot spend exactly 5 dollars, no matter if he like both Apples and cantaloupes or just 1 of them
if (2) is true: Clark can spend exactly 5 dollars if he like both Apples and Bananas, But he cannot do it if he only like 1 of them

A certain fruit stand sells only apples for $0.26 each, bananas for $0

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) Questions

A certain fruit stand sells only apples for $0.26 each, bananas for $0

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards