In some months last year, Natalie, a sales representative at SmithKlin

Question

In some months last year, Natalie, a sales representative at SmithKline & Beecham, went over $60000 in sales. In how many months last year did she do so?

(1) Last year, the number of months in which Natalie went over $60000 was 8 months more than the number of months in which she did not.

(2) Last year, the number of months in which Natalie went below $60000 was 1/5 the number of months in which she did not.

DavidTutorexamPAL · Answer

1) the important fact here is that the cases in which she did and did not go over are complementary. This means that if she didn't go over x months, and did x+8 months, then we know that 
x + x + 8 = 12 
2x =4 
x = 2. 
went over 2+8=10 months. 
Sufficient!

2) using the same logic of before: 
x + 5x = 12 
6x=12
x=2
5x=10 
sufficient!

answer D.

satya2029 · Answer

I have a doubt here -
In 2)
could you please tell me how did you come to know that in those 5X months Natalie crossed $60000. How about sales=$60,000? We are asked about sales above $60000.
Thanks
SATYA

DavidTutorexamPAL · Answer

we are told "the number of months in which Natalie went below $60000 was 1/5 the number of months in which she did not". 
so if we call months not below x, then months below is 5x. 
since there is a total of 12 months, we get the equation:
x+5x=12

truplayer257 · Answer

I was thinking the same thing. Statement 2 would not be sufficient because of this.

Posted from my mobile device

Henry_N_11 · Answer

This one is a bit controversial isn't it?
One could argue that there might be months in which sales EQUAL 60 k
this would change the problem because we would have the following equations:
equal + over + below = 12

1) o = (b+e)+8
2) b = (o+e)*1/5

In this case, (1) would be sufficient because we would have o + (o-8) = 12 => o = 10. But (2) alone would not be sufficient because we would only be able to find that b+5b=12 => b=2, but we would not be able to find o. So the correct answer is indeed (A) if we use this logic, and not (D) as some comments are suggesting.

salilbagai · Answer

I think the question is absolutely correct. St 1 is sufficient and statement is not. Mathematics is simple here, its just the language nuances one needs to focus on.

hr1212 · Answer

Bunuel , is it a required assumption that Natalie works 12 months?

Because if not, then let o,u,e be the months when she makes over, under and equal to $60k.

o + u + e <= 12

Statement 1 => o = (u + e) + 8
o + o - 8 <= 12
2o <= 20
o <= 10

Still I can't definitively answer no. of months when the the sales got over $60k.

Am I missing anything here?

anirchat · Answer

The question is absolutely spot on.
For statement 1)  Went over 60,000  = Total - Did not go over 60,000 (- Includes < 60000 and = 60000). Solvable.
For statement 2) Below 60,000 = Total - Did not go below 60,000 (- Includes  > 60000  and = 60000). - We get two variables in one equation. Cannot solve.

ngocvb092 · Answer

Want to ask about the possibility that Natalie doesnot work full12 months

In some months last year, Natalie, a sales representative at SmithKlin

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

In some months last year, Natalie, a sales representative at SmithKlin

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