Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jun 0808:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Master the GMAT with expert live instruction, a personalized study plan, and real-time support. Includes 40 hours of online classes plus 6 months of access to the TTP GMAT OnDemand video course. Mon/Wed June 8, 2026 →August 12, 2026 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..- Jun 10
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Scoring 715 on the GMAT Focus Edition requires more than just learning formulas, memorizing concepts, or solving hundreds of questions. In this episode, Nishant shares how he improved his GMAT preparation by focusing on application of concepts, and more. 
Jun 1111:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
TTP GMAT OnDemand gives serious students 400+ hours of expert video instruction, the full TTP course, AI support, weekly office hours, and a 715+ score guarantee—all built for elite GMAT score improvement.
16 Dec 2024, 09:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Problem with Version 1: It contains requirements that contradict each other.
Problem with Version 2: It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
62% (02:11) correct
38%
(02:34)
wrong
based on 1360
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Two flawed rough-draft versions of a section of a contract:
Version 1: The client shall pay $4,500 (the fee) on or before 7 August 2017. If the fee is not paid by that date, the client shall also pay a late charge of $100, and the total amount of that late charge shall not exceed 1 percent of the $4,500 fee.
Version 2: The client shall pay $4,500 (the fee) on or before 7 August 2017. If the fee is not paid by that date, the client shall pay an additional charge of $100 for each month in which the fee remains unpaid. The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee.
Select for Problem with Version 1 the statement that most accurately describes a way in which Version 1 is flawed, and select for Problem with Version 2 the statement that most accurately describes a way in which Version 2 is flawed. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Version 1: The client shall pay $4,500 (the fee) on or before 7 August 2017. If the fee is not paid by that date, the client shall also pay a late charge of $100, and the total amount of that late charge shall not exceed 1 percent of the $4,500 fee.
Version 2: The client shall pay $4,500 (the fee) on or before 7 August 2017. If the fee is not paid by that date, the client shall pay an additional charge of $100 for each month in which the fee remains unpaid. The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee.
Select for Problem with Version 1 the statement that most accurately describes a way in which Version 1 is flawed, and select for Problem with Version 2 the statement that most accurately describes a way in which Version 2 is flawed. Make only two selections, one in each column.
| Problem with Version 1 | Problem with Version 2 | |
| It uses the term client in two mutually exclusive ways without acknowledging the difference in meaning | ||
| It proposes a definition for a technical term even though that term is irrelevant to the topic it addresses. | ||
| It contains requirements that contradict each other. | ||
| It uses the words that date without any indication of what date they refer to. | ||
| It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Problem with Version 1: It contains requirements that contradict each other.
Problem with Version 2: It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition.
Need more Tests to Practice?
GMAT Club Tests give expert solutions for every question in full and sectional GMAT Focus mocks.
Learn more →
16 Dec 2024, 11:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
Version 1: The late charge is stated as $100 but is capped at 1 percent of $4,500, which equals $45. These two requirements are contradictory: the charge cannot both be $100 per late payment and limited to $45 in total.
Problem with Version 1:
"It contains requirements that contradict each other."
Version 2: The statement, "The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee," is necessarily true and uninformative because the fee alone ($4,500) already exceeds 1 percent of $4,500 ($45) without considering any late charges. This condition adds no useful information.
Problem with Version 2:
"It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition."
Problem with Version 1:
"It contains requirements that contradict each other."
Version 2: The statement, "The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee," is necessarily true and uninformative because the fee alone ($4,500) already exceeds 1 percent of $4,500 ($45) without considering any late charges. This condition adds no useful information.
Problem with Version 2:
"It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition."
17 Dec 2024, 12:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. Version 1 has this, "the client shall also pay a late charge of $100, and the total amount of that late charge shall not exceed 1 percent of the $4,500 fee." 1 percent of the $4,500 fee is $45, however this is less than $100. So, the statement that best explains why version 1 is faulty is, "It contains requirements that contradict each other."
2. Version 2 has this, "the client shall pay an additional charge of $100 for each month in which the fee remains unpaid. The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee." 1 percent of the $4,500 fee is $45 and this is obviously less than $100 multiplied by the number of months the fee remains unpaid. So, the statement that best explains why version 2 is faulty is, "It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition."
2. Version 2 has this, "the client shall pay an additional charge of $100 for each month in which the fee remains unpaid. The total amount of the fee plus any additional charges will exceed 1 percent of the fee." 1 percent of the $4,500 fee is $45 and this is obviously less than $100 multiplied by the number of months the fee remains unpaid. So, the statement that best explains why version 2 is faulty is, "It stipulates a necessarily true but pointless and uninformative condition."
