BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

DS Question please help

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 5:58 am
Thanked: 1 times
by moonlite » Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:52 pm
Is m not equal to n?

1) m + n < 0
2) mn < 0

OA is B

The explanation given is that since mn is negative one of the two numbers must be negative and the other positive.

BUT

can't we say that .5 x .5 = 0.25 which is also less than 0?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Data Sufficiency |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 amFollowed by: 2 members
Thanked: 146 times

Re: DS Question please help

by parallel_chase » Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:12 pm
moonlite wrote:Is m not equal to n?

1) m + n < 0
2) mn < 0

OA is B

The explanation given is that since mn is negative one of the two numbers must be negative and the other positive.

BUT

can't we say that .5 x .5 = 0.25 which is also less than 0?
0.25 is greater than 0

Therefore statement B is sufficient as one number has to positive and one number has to be negative.

Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any doubts.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 1:08 pm
Location: Orange County, CA

confused - data sufficiency...

by acerche » Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:31 pm
why isn't the answer D.

because looking at 1....

m+n < 0
therefore m < -n sufficient

or

n < -m sufficient

i.e. m does not equal n

am I missing something??
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 12:16 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Location: Glendale, AZ
Thanked: 3 times

by jaybrium » Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:46 pm
The answer is B- try not to overthink this one.

I) m + n < 0

m = -2
n = -1

-2 + -1 = -3 < 0; m is not equal to n

m = -2
n = -2

-2 + -2 = -4 < 0; m is equal to n; two answers are possible, insufficent

acerche, notice that m < -n and n < -m holds true in both these situations.

II) see Parellel Chase's explanation.

B :-)
- Jay
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1