Last visit was: 03 Sep 2026, 10:45 It is currently 03 Sep 2026, 10:45
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
User avatar
honchos
User avatar
Joined: 17 Apr 2013
Last visit: 30 Aug 2021
Posts: 358
Own Kudos:
2,518
 [2]
Given Kudos: 298
Status:Verbal Forum Moderator
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 2: 750 Q51 V41
GMAT 3: 790 Q51 V49
GPA: 3.3
GMAT 3: 790 Q51 V49
Posts: 358
Kudos: 2,518
 [2]
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 04 Oct 2013, 11:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (02:22) correct 39% (02:13) wrong based on 410 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.
(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
B
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 113,090
Own Kudos:
838,882
 [4]
Given Kudos: 111,298
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 113,090
Kudos: 838,882
 [4]
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 13 Oct 2013, 03:22
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

In 2004:
{revenues from truck sales} = x.
{revenues from car sales} = 1.2x

In 2005:
{revenues from truck sales} = x.
{revenues from car sales} = ?.

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20% from 2004. If the revenue from car sales were down by 0%, then the answer would be YES but if the revenue from car sales were down by 19%, then the answer would be NO (1.2x*0.81<x). Not sufficient.

(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18% from 2004. Even if the revenue from car sales were down by only 18%, the revenue from car sales still would be less than x --> 1.2x*0.82<x. Sufficient.

Answer: B.
User avatar
rohit8865
User avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2015
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 814
Own Kudos:
1,028
Given Kudos: 45
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 814
Kudos: 1,028
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 17 Jun 2016, 11:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ICsharp
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.
(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.
Show more
take easy values for consideration
Let revenues from truck sales in 2004 =Rs 100
revenues from car sales=Rs 120 .
revenues from truck sales in 2005=Rs 100
revenues from car sales in 2005=?(<or> Rs100)
Statement(1) the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004
say it was down 19%...19%less of 120=Rs 97.2 (97.2<100)...NO
or it was down 1%...1%less of 120=Rs 118.8 (118.8>100)...YES.
Not sufff....
(2) the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004
even if you take a value 18.1% decreased it will be >Rs 100
120(1-18.1/100)=98.....it will always<100(truck sales revenue)
suff...
Ans B
User avatar
Divyadisha
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Last visit: 01 Jun 2018
Posts: 659
Own Kudos:
1,973
Given Kudos: 69
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
Posts: 659
Kudos: 1,973
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 17 Jun 2016, 15:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ICsharp
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.
(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.
Show more

Let's say revenue from truck sales in 2004= 100
Revenue from car sales in 2004 = 120

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.

If the revenues were 20% less. Then, the actual revenue would have been 120 - 120*20/100= 120-24

But since the revenues are down less then 20%, revenues can be 19% (<revenues by trucks) or 10% (>revenues by trucks)

Not sufficient.

(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.
if it were 18%, then the revenues would have been 120- 120*18/100= 120- 22 (approximately)

But since revenues were down more than 18 %; revenues were always less than 100, and less than revenues from trucks. Sufficient.

B is the answer
User avatar
AdlaT
User avatar
Joined: 06 Oct 2013
Last visit: 12 May 2017
Posts: 38
Own Kudos:
165
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 38
Kudos: 165
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 29 Jun 2016, 13:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ICsharp
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.
(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.
Show more
.

SOLUTION:

let t be the revenues from Trucks sales , and let c be the revenues from Cars sales .

In 2004, \(c=0.2*t--->t=0.83*c\).

In 2005, t is same as in 2004.

Statement 1). In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20 % from 2004.

In 2005, new revenues from car sales= \(c-(<0.2*c)\) = \(>0.8*c\).
so it may or may not be less than \(0.83*c.\)

Hence Insufficient.


Statement 2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18 % from 2004.

In 2005 , new revenues from care sales=\(c-(>0.18*c) = <0.82*c.\)

it is always less than \(0.83*c\).

Hence Sufficient.

Ans B
User avatar
Sash143
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2015
Last visit: 26 Jul 2022
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
757
Given Kudos: 2
Posts: 62
Kudos: 757
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 16 Feb 2017, 02:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
2004 ---> C = 1.2 T
2005 ---> T is same and Is C still greater than T? Yes/No

1) C was down less than 20%.
Say C IS down by 20%

In 2004 ---> Suppose T = 100 then C will be 120.
In 2005 ---> C is down by 20% so C = 96 and less than 20% will make C>96.
We know T = 100 (remains unchanged)
So if C=97 and T=100....its NO (C is not greater than T)
if C=101 and T=100.....its YES (C is greater than T)
INSUFF

2) C is down more than 18%.
Again say C IS down by 20%.

From above w.k.t C=96 when its down by 20% (which is clearly more than 18%) and if continues to be more down then C<96.....Always NO
Hence SUFF

Option B :-D
User avatar
apoo151997
User avatar
Joined: 26 Sep 2023
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 4
Given Kudos: 587
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Leadership
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V27
GPA: 3.24
WE:Project Management (Education)
Products:
Forum Quiz
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V27
Posts: 4
Kudos: 0
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 13 Aug 2026, 02:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I’m a little confused by the wording of the question. It says that the “revenues from tram truck sales” remained unchanged. Does this mean the total revenue from all truck sales remained unchanged, or is it referring to a particular type/model of truck?
If there are multiple types of trucks, the revenue from the other truck categories could increase or decrease, which would affect the total truck revenue. I think the question should explicitly say “total revenues from all truck sales remained unchanged” if that is the intended meaning.

Bunuel
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 2004, revenues from car sales were 20 % more than the revenues from truck sales. In 2005, if the revenues tram truck sales kept unchanged, were the revenues form car sales still greater than the revenue from truck sales?

In 2004:
{revenues from truck sales} = x.
{revenues from car sales} = 1.2x

In 2005:
{revenues from truck sales} = x.
{revenues from car sales} = ?.

(1) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down less than 20% from 2004. If the revenue from car sales were down by 0%, then the answer would be YES but if the revenue from car sales were down by 19%, then the answer would be NO (1.2x*0.81<x). Not sufficient.

(2) In 2005, the revenues from car sales were down more than 18% from 2004. Even if the revenue from car sales were down by only 18%, the revenue from car sales still would be less than x --> 1.2x*0.82<x. Sufficient.

Answer: B.
Show more
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 6,289
Own Kudos:
33,896
Given Kudos: 715
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 6,289
Kudos: 33,896
A certain company that sells only cars and trucks reported that in 200 13 Aug 2026, 12:55
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi apoo151997,

Good instinct to slow down on wording, but here the phrase is simpler than it looks.

Notice how the problem opens: the company sells only cars and trucks. That single sentence sets up exactly two revenue streams for the whole company - one from all cars, one from all trucks. There are no sub-categories, models, or types anywhere in the stimulus. So "trucks" is one lumped bucket, not a particular model.

That's why Bunuel could write the setup as just two quantities:

- {revenues from truck sales} = x
- {revenues from car sales} = 1.2x

There's no third or fourth variable for "other truck types," because the problem never introduces one. When it says truck revenue "kept unchanged," it means that whole bucket stayed at x.

The key reading habit: in DS, you work only with the categories the problem actually names. If the test wanted you to split trucks into sub-types, it would have to give you those pieces and their revenues - otherwise there's nothing to compute with. Inventing hidden subcategories would leave the problem unsolvable, which is a signal you've added information that isn't there.

You're right that "total revenues from all truck sales" would be more explicit. But since the company's only two products are cars and trucks, "revenues from truck sales" can only mean the total from trucks - there's nothing else it could refer to.

So read it as: total truck revenue = x in 2004, still x in 2005. Then the question is just whether 2005 car revenue is above or below that x, which is exactly what statements (1) and (2) let you test. Once the wording is settled this way, the rest of the thread's work follows cleanly.

Answer: B

apoo151997
I’m a little confused by the wording of the question. It says that the “revenues from tram truck sales” remained unchanged. Does this mean the total revenue from all truck sales remained unchanged, or is it referring to a particular type/model of truck?
If there are multiple types of trucks, the revenue from the other truck categories could increase or decrease, which would affect the total truck revenue. I think the question should explicitly say “total revenues from all truck sales remained unchanged” if that is the intended meaning.


Show more
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
113090 posts
FrozenDragon
DI Forum Moderator
409 posts