Graduate Management Admission Test GMAT Dashboard

BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

To determine who earned the most total credits in Science and Math, both statements must be considered together, as neither statement alone provides enough information to reach a conclusion.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (1) provides information about the relationships between Zara, Bryan, Charlie, and Diana's credits, but it does not give the precise credit amounts necessary to determine who earned the most. Therefore, statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (2 indicates that Bryan has fewer total credits than Charlie and that Diana's Science credits exceed both Bryan's and Charlie's combined credits. However, it does not specify the actual credit amounts for any of the friends, making it insufficient on its own to determine the highest total credits.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

When combined, statements (1) and (2) provide a complete picture of the relationships among the friends' credits. Statement (1) establishes how Zara compares to Bryan and Charlie, while statement (2) provides context on Diana's credits relative to the others. Together, they allow us to conclude that Diana earned the most total credits.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

This option is incorrect because neither statement provides enough standalone information to determine the total credits earned by each friend. Both statements are necessary to derive a conclusion.

Conclusion

The correct answer is C because it reflects that both statements are required to ascertain who earned the most credits. Statement (1) outlines the relationships among the friends' credits, while statement (2) clarifies Diana's position, allowing us to ultimately identify her as the one with the highest total credits.

The average age of all faculty members cannot be determined from the given statements.

Neither statement alone provides enough information to calculate the average age of all faculty members in the Physics Department, and even when combined, they do not yield a definitive answer.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (1) indicates that there are four times as many nontenured faculty members as tenured faculty members, but without knowing the actual number of tenured faculty members or their ages, we cannot compute the overall average age. Therefore, this statement alone is insufficient.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (2) provides the number of tenured faculty members but does not give any information about their ages. Without this information, we cannot determine the overall average age. Hence, this statement alone is also insufficient.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

Combining both statements does not resolve the issue of missing information regarding the ages of the tenured faculty. While we know there are tenured faculty members, we still lack their age details to determine the overall average. Thus, this option is incorrect.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

As analyzed, neither statement provides the necessary information to calculate the average age of all faculty members. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

This is the correct answer, as combining the two statements does not allow for the calculation of the average age of all faculty members in the Physics Department. The necessary information about the ages of tenured faculty is missing.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the average age of all faculty members cannot be determined based on the provided statements. Both statements fail to provide critical information about the ages of the tenured faculty, and therefore, the correct answer is that the statements together are not sufficient to calculate the overall average age.

Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Based on the information provided in statement (1), we can determine the number of adults in the group, while statement (2) lacks sufficient information to reach a conclusion.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

This option is correct because statement (1) provides specific information that allows us to calculate the number of adults in the group based on the conditions provided. It offers enough data to understand the composition of the group fully.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

This option is incorrect because statement (2) does not provide enough information to determine the number of adults in the group. It fails to define any specific parameters that would help identify the count of adults.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

This option is incorrect because if statement (1) alone is sufficient, then it is unnecessary to combine both statements. The sufficiency of statement (1) negates the need for statement (2) to clarify the number of adults.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

This option is incorrect because statement (2) alone does not provide enough information, while statement (1) does. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that each statement alone is sufficient.

E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

This option is incorrect as it contradicts the finding that statement (1) alone is sufficient. The combination of both statements is not needed to determine the number of adults, making this option invalid.

Conclusion

The correct option, A, is valid as statement (1) provides sufficient information to ascertain the number of adults in the group, while statement (2) fails to offer any useful data on its own. Thus, option A is the only one that accurately reflects the sufficiency of the statements regarding the group's composition.

The total amount that the store would spend in the first year for Plan A is closest to 11,800.

By choosing Plan A, the store incurs a one-time purchase and installation cost of $10,000, along with ongoing monthly maintenance costs of $250 for 12 months. However, there are no cash loading costs associated with this plan. Therefore, the total expenditure for the first year would amount to $10,000 plus $3,000 in maintenance costs, resulting in a total of $13,000.

A) 1,800

This amount is incorrect as it fails to account for the substantial one-time cost of purchasing and installing the ATM, which is $10,000 alone. The ongoing monthly costs also contribute to a significantly higher total.

B) 10,000

While this option correctly lists the one-time purchase and installation cost, it disregards the additional ongoing maintenance costs incurred throughout the year. The total amount will exceed this figure once maintenance is included.

C) 11,800

This is the correct answer because it represents the total costs incurred in the first year: the initial purchase and installation cost of $10,000 plus $1,800 for maintenance costs ($250 per month for 12 months). This sum accurately reflects the overall expenditure.

D) 14,800

This amount is incorrect as it likely miscalculates the total by possibly including incorrect assumptions about cash loading costs or miscalculating maintenance costs. The total should not exceed the sum of the purchase and maintenance costs provided.

E) 16,000

This option is also incorrect as it overestimates the total amount spent by including costs that are not applicable under Plan A, particularly cash loading costs which are not part of this plan.

Conclusion

The total expenditure for the store under Plan A amounts to $11,800 when considering the one-time purchase cost and the monthly maintenance fees. All other options either underestimate or overestimate the total costs by failing to account for the necessary expenses involved in maintaining the ATM. Thus, Plan A's financial implications lead to the definitive choice of option C.

Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Using the information from Statement (1), the predicted revenue for 2001 is $11,000,000. Since the revenue for each subsequent year is 10% more than the previous year, we can calculate the revenues for the following years. This allows us to find that the predicted revenue first exceeds $16,000,000 in 2005.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

This option is correct because Statement (1) provides a clear starting point for the revenue calculations. With the initial revenue of $11,000,000 for 2001, we can compute the revenues for subsequent years, eventually determining that the first year the predicted revenue exceeds $16,000,000 is 2005.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

This option is incorrect as Statement (2) indicates that the predicted revenue for 2004 is $4,641,000 more than the revenue for 2000. However, without knowing the revenue for 2000 or having a specific starting revenue, we cannot calculate the revenues for the years leading up to 2004 or subsequently.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

This option is incorrect because while Statement (2) provides additional information about the revenue in 2004, it does not contribute to our ability to calculate the first year that exceeds $16,000,000 without the base revenue from Statement (1).

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

This option is incorrect as Statement (2) alone does not provide enough information to determine the predicted revenues for all years, while Statement (1) alone is sufficient for the calculations.

E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

This option is incorrect because Statement (1) alone provides sufficient information to calculate the required revenue projections, making this conclusion inaccurate.

Conclusion

Statement (1) provides the necessary starting revenue to calculate the annual projections, clearly allowing us to identify the first year when the predicted revenue exceeds $16,000,000. Statement (2) does not independently allow for the determination of the annual revenues, thus confirming that only Statement (1) is sufficient. Hence, option A is the definitive correct choice.

Each statement alone is sufficient.

Both statements provided are sufficient to determine whether it is February 28th today. Statement (1) indicates that Lynn had a birthday party exactly four years ago, implying that it is a leap year, while Statement (2) confirms that Pete turned 24 today, indicating that he was born on a leap day and thus reinforces the conclusion.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (1) alone provides information about Lynn's birthday party occurring four years ago, which suggests it was a leap year. However, without knowing Pete's age, we cannot definitively conclude that today is February 28th, making this option incorrect.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (2) indicates that Pete turned 24 today, which means he was born on February 29. Since 24 years from a leap day must be in a leap year, this implies that it is indeed February 28 today. However, this statement alone does not provide the context of Lynn's birthday celebrations, rendering this option incorrect.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

While both statements together confirm that it is February 28, each statement independently conveys sufficient information regarding the leap year status of both Lynn and Pete's birthdays. Therefore, this option is not accurate.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

Each statement provides enough information on its own. Statement (1) confirms the occurrence of a birthday party four years ago, indicating a leap year, while Statement (2) confirms Pete's age and that he also celebrates his birthday on February 29. This demonstrates that both statements independently lead to the conclusion that today is February 28, making this option correct.

Conclusion

The correct answer is D, as both statements provide sufficient information individually to arrive at the conclusion that today is February 28th. Each statement highlights different aspects of the birthday scenario, confirming that both Lynn and Pete's birthdays are celebrated on leap days, thus validating the date in question.

Cora works the 11:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. time slot.

Cora's time slot begins with an even number and must be later than George's 9:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m. time slot. Given the information, the only suitable time slot for Cora is from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., making both statements sufficient on their own.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (1) indicates that Cora's time slot is not immediately before George's, which eliminates the possibility of her working from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. However, it does not provide enough information to determine her exact time slot since it does not specify whether her slot is later than George's. Therefore, this statement alone is insufficient.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (2) confirms that Cora's time slot is later than George's. While this indicates that Cora cannot work from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., it doesn’t specify the exact time slot. As such, this statement alone does not provide definite information about Cora's slot, making it insufficient by itself.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

While combining both statements provides more context about Cora's slot being not immediately after George's and later in the day, they are not needed together to ascertain her time slot. Therefore, this option does not accurately reflect the sufficiency of the statements when considered individually.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

Each statement independently provides sufficient information to determine Cora's time slot. Statement (1) clarifies that she cannot work before George's time, while statement (2) confirms she works later. Together, they lead to the conclusion that her only possible time slot is from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Conclusion

Cora’s time slot is definitively determined to be 11:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., as both statements independently affirm that she cannot work before George and must begin at an even hour later. Thus, Option D is correct as both statements alone suffice in establishing the required information, while the other options do not meet the criteria for sufficiency.

Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

Both statements alone do not provide enough information to determine the specific distance between Beth's and Carol's homes after they moved, nor do they confirm the total distance traveled post-move.

A) Statement (1) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (1) provides total distance information about the trip involving Ann, Beth, and Carol, but does not specify any details about the distances between Beth's and Carol's homes after they moved. Therefore, this option is incorrect.

B) Statement (2) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient.

Statement (2) indicates that the straight-line distance between Beth's and Carol's homes decreased by 90%, but it lacks context about their original positions or how this affects the total distance traveled. Thus, this option is also incorrect.

C) BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.

Even when combined, the two statements do not enable us to calculate or confirm the total distance traveled after Beth and Carol moved. The statements fail to provide a clear relationship or numerical values necessary for understanding the new distances. Hence, this option is incorrect.

D) EACH statement ALONE is sufficient.

Neither statement provides enough information individually to ascertain the total distance traveled after the moves. Therefore, this option is also incorrect.

E) Statements (1) and (2) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient.

This option correctly identifies that even when considering both statements, they do not provide adequate information to determine the distances involved after Beth and Carol's movements. The lack of specific numerical values or relationships means we cannot conclude anything definitive about the new distances.

Conclusion

The correct answer is E, as neither statement alone nor in combination provides sufficient information to determine the distances required. Both statements lack the necessary context and specifics to yield a definitive conclusion about the new distances between the homes after the moves.

Sufficient information is available for Products A and D to determine if their unit prices are less than €3.

The information provided allows us to conclude that the unit prices for Products A and D can be assessed for whether they are below €3. However, for Products B and C, the information is insufficient to make that determination.

A) Product A

The data for Product A includes specific subtotal amounts from recent purchases, enabling us to calculate the unit price. Since the number of units purchased is an integer, we can derive whether the unit price is less than €3 based on the subtotal provided.

B) Product B

For Product B, the information lacks sufficient detail to determine its unit price. Although a subtotal is provided, without knowing the number of units purchased specifically for this product, we cannot ascertain if the unit price is below €3.

C) Product C

Similar to Product B, the information regarding Product C does not provide enough detail to make a determination about its unit price. The subtotal does not allow for a calculation of the unit price without knowledge of the quantity purchased.

D) Product D

The details provided for Product D include specific subtotal amounts and integer quantities purchased. This information is adequate to assess whether the unit price is less than €3, enabling a direct evaluation of the product's pricing.

Conclusion

In summary, the information available is sufficient for Products A and D to determine if their unit prices are below €3, while it is insufficient for Products B and C. The ability to compute unit prices from provided subtotals and integer quantities makes A and D clearly evaluable, whereas the lack of complete information for B and C renders them indeterminate.