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

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

GMAT Prep question

Expert replies
by Abdulla » Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:15 pm
A combined of 55 light bulbs are stored in two boxes; of these, a total of 7 are broken. If there are exactly two broken bulbs in the first box, what is the number of bulbs in the second box that are not broken?

(1) In the first box, the number of bulbs that are not broken is 15 times the number of the broken bulbs.

(2) The total number of bulbs in the first box is 9 more than the total number of bulbs in the second box.

OA is D

Can someone explain why statement 2 sufficient?
Abdulla
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by Testluv » Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:28 pm
A combined of 55 light bulbs are stored in two boxes; of these, a total of 7 are broken. If there are exactly two broken bulbs in the first box, what is the number of bulbs in the second box that are not broken?

(1) In the first box, the number of bulbs that are not broken is 15 times the number of the broken bulbs.

(2) The total number of bulbs in the first box is 9 more than the total number of bulbs in the second box.

OA is D

Can someone explain why statement 2 sufficient?
Hi!

Let's first focus on the question stem, stocking up our info, and then thinking about what information is necessary to answer the question.

We are asked for the number not broken in the second box. We know there are 55 bulbs in total and that 7 of them are broken. We know there are 2 broken in the first box, and 5 broken in the second box, (and that the other 48 remaining bulbs are not broken.)

We will be able to compute the number of not broken in the second box if we know the total number in the second box...or if we know the total number in the first box...and, finally, because we know that the total is 55, we will also have sufficiency if we get a special equation relating the total number in the first box to the total number in the second box.


Statement 2: this is a special equation that will allow us to compute the total number in the second box. Once we have that, we would simply subtract the 5 broken, and we'd have the number not broken in the second box. But because this is data sufficiency, instead of actually doing that math, we would just realize (after/during our analysis) that we COULD do it.

So here's the work we wouldn't actually do:

# in 1st box + # in 2nd box =55 (from question)
# in 1st box = # in 2nd box + 9 (statement 2)

subbing in:

(# in 2nd box + 9) + # in 2nd box =55

solving:
# in 2nd box = 23
Therefore, number of not broken in 2nd box is 23-5= 18
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Join the discussion

by Abdulla » Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:43 pm
Thanks Testluv..
Abdulla
Join the discussion