Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
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.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart 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

GPREP - 1 (Explanation Plzzz..)

Expert replies
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by technicor » Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:16 pm
I think this is the solution.....

is 1 sufficient?
Plug in variables

Say m=1 z=-2, the answer is NO
Saym=100 and z=1, then YES

So 1 is insufficent

2
Say z=1, m=6, YES
Say z=-4, m=2, NO

Not sufficient

combined sufficent?

If you want to flip an inequality, multiply the whole side by -1
So, m-3z > 0 as is m-4z>0

m>3z, or m>4z. Insert variables -1 and -3 or 4 and 1. Different solutions. Therefore

E, no solution
Join the discussion

by amitansu » Thu Aug 14, 2008 3:41 am
It should be 'C'.

From 1: m-3z>0 => m>3z

both m and z could be positive or negative to satusfy this.
example : let m=7; z=2 so,m>3z ; here m+z>0

let m=-5 and z=-2 so, m>3z but here m+z<0
so not sufficient

From 2: 4z-m<0=>4z<m
let z=2, m=9 so 4z<m ; here m+n>0
let z=-2 amd m=-3; here 4z<m; but m+n <0, not sufficient

Now combining both :

from (1) m-3z>0
from (2) 4z-m<0=>m-4z>0
solving (1) and (2) z>0 => m>0 (since m>3z)
So, m+n >0; sufficient.


Amit
Join the discussion

by kiran.raze » Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:02 am
Hi Amit,

Just co-relating to the solution you have presented:

m-3z>0
m-4z>0

there are cases when

-->M Z
1>+ +
2> - -
3>+ -
what Im trying to say is that there are values which satisfy all the above cases of M&Z based on the 2 inequalities stated above(for eg: substitute m=5,z=1for op1,m=-1,z=-1 for op2,m=4,z=-1for op3). And for these options there can be different options of vaues for m+Z i.e. it can + for
option 1,- for op 2, not sure for op3 - so then how can both be suffiecient to arrive at an answer ....Could you please elaborate for my understanding ??[/u]
Join the discussion

by kiran.raze » Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:03 am
Hi Amit,

Just co-relating to the solution you have presented:

m-3z>0
m-4z>0

there are cases when

-->M Z
1>+ +
2> - -
3>+ -
what Im trying to say is that there are values which satisfy all the above cases of M&Z based on the 2 inequalities stated above(for eg: substitute m=5,z=1for op1,m=-1,z=-1 for op2,m=4,z=-1for op3). And for these options there can be different options of vaues for m+Z i.e. it can + for
option 1,- for op 2, not sure for op3 - so then how can both be suffiecient to arrive at an answer ....Could you please elaborate for my understanding ??[/u]
Join the discussion

Re: GPREP - 1 (Explanation Plzzz..)

by kshin78 » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:13 am
raptor84 wrote:IS m+z>0

1) m-3z>0
2) 4z-m<0


OA C
hmm...i'm also getting E.

we know it's not A or B so it's either C or E.

option 1: m=5, z=1
Satisfies statement 1 & 2 and 5+1 = 6 > 0

option 2: m= -4, z= -2
1) -4 - 3(-2) = 2 > 0
2) 4(-2) - -4 = -4 < 0

m + z > 0 ====> -4 + - 2 = -6 < 0

it's giving conflicting results so shouldn't the answer be E?

Anyone?
Join the discussion

by sharad » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:16 am
the ans should be E
m=2 z = -3
m =4 z = -3

These two values satisfies 1 & 2 and will give you both negative and positive value for m+z...
Hence E
Join the discussion

Re: GPREP - 1 (Explanation Plzzz..)

by sudhir3127 » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:23 am
raptor84 wrote:IS m+z>0

1) m-3z>0
2) 4z-m<0


OA C
I go with C..

here it is..

Adding statement 1 and 2 we get Z > 0 and if Z > 0
and if M-3z>0, it implies that M >0

thus hence m+z > 0

Hope it helps.. do let me know if u have any doubts..
Join the discussion

by Suyog » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:31 am
@Sudhir3127 can u please comment on Kshin78's post. Thanks!
Join the discussion

by amitansu » Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:37 am
Suyog wrote:@Sudhir3127 can u please comment on Kshin78's post. Thanks!

When 'm' and 'z' are assumed; one time with +ve sign and other time with -ve sign they give no definite solution whether (m+z) >0 or not.

At times m+z>0 and at times (m+z) is <0.

When we combine the two (given) statements, we get that z is definitely > 0 and since m>3z => m is +ve. (i.e. 'z' and 'm' get their unique signs as being both positive when they both satisfy stem 1 & stem2).

When we combine two statements, we generally try to get some definite value/s or sign/s out of it to see whether it gives a definite ans always.
And that is what we get here , both "m" & "z" are positive and m>z, both satisfying two statements at the same time.

Hope this justifies.


Amit
Join the discussion

by gmatters2vj » Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:06 am
IS m+z>0

1) m-3z>0
2) 4z-m<0

1) m>3z
For z<0:
m+z can be +ve as well as -ve
Insufficient

2) m>4z
Again For z<0:
m+z can be +ve as well as -ve
Insufficient

Combining the 2 conditions we have
m>3z & m>4z.
These conditions will be true simultaneously only when
m>4z.
Which essentially gives us the second condition.
So insufficient.

I'll go with answer E.

Any comments?

Thanks
Join the discussion

by Suyog » Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:48 am
amitansu wrote:
Suyog wrote:@Sudhir3127 can u please comment on Kshin78's post. Thanks!

When 'm' and 'z' are assumed; one time with +ve sign and other time with -ve sign they give no definite solution whether (m+z) >0 or not.

At times m+z>0 and at times (m+z) is <0.
That's precisely what I'm trying to say, if with (I) & (II), we are getting different answer then how come its 'C'

When we combine two statements, we generally try to get some definite value/s or sign/s out of it to see whether it gives a definite ans always.
And that is what we get here , both "m" & "z" are positive and m>z, both satisfying two statements at the same time.
I guess m=5, z=1 are definite values

Which satisfies (I) & (II) both and it says the question asked is true.

Also, m= -4, z= -2 are again definite values

which again satisfies (I) & (II) both but it says the question asked is false.

I still don't agree...Sorry..

Someone needs to convince me....
Join the discussion

by amitansu » Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:04 am
Suyog wrote:
amitansu wrote:
Suyog wrote:@Sudhir3127 can u please comment on Kshin78's post. Thanks!

When 'm' and 'z' are assumed; one time with +ve sign and other time with -ve sign they give no definite solution whether (m+z) >0 or not.

At times m+z>0 and at times (m+z) is <0.
That's precisely what I'm trying to say, if with (I) & (II), we are getting different answer then how come its 'C'

When we combine two statements, we generally try to get some definite value/s or sign/s out of it to see whether it gives a definite ans always.
And that is what we get here , both "m" & "z" are positive and m>z, both satisfying two statements at the same time.
I guess m=5, z=1 are definite values

Which satisfies (I) & (II) both and it says the question asked is true.

Also, m= -4, z= -2 are again definite values

which again satisfies (I) & (II) both but it says the question asked is false.

I still don't agree...Sorry..

Someone needs to convince me....

Well, combining both statements we get both 'z' and 'm' as positive.
So we can't assume them negative.
Join the discussion

by Suyog » Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:17 am
amitansu wrote:
Suyog wrote:
amitansu wrote:
Suyog wrote:@Sudhir3127 can u please comment on Kshin78's post. Thanks!

When 'm' and 'z' are assumed; one time with +ve sign and other time with -ve sign they give no definite solution whether (m+z) >0 or not.

At times m+z>0 and at times (m+z) is <0.
That's precisely what I'm trying to say, if with (I) & (II), we are getting different answer then how come its 'C'

When we combine two statements, we generally try to get some definite value/s or sign/s out of it to see whether it gives a definite ans always.
And that is what we get here , both "m" & "z" are positive and m>z, both satisfying two statements at the same time.
I guess m=5, z=1 are definite values

Which satisfies (I) & (II) both and it says the question asked is true.

Also, m= -4, z= -2 are again definite values

which again satisfies (I) & (II) both but it says the question asked is false.

I still don't agree...Sorry..

Someone needs to convince me....

Well, combining both statements we get both 'z' and 'm' as positive.
So we can't assume them negative.

Why u r considering 'z' & 'm' as positive???
Consider
m= -4, z= -2

Now solve...

1) m-3z>0
-4 + 6 = 2, which is greater than 0

2) 4z-m<0
-8 +4 = -4, which is less than 0

doesn't value for m & z both satisfy 1 as well as 2

Now would u say that combining both statements we get both 'z' and 'm' as negative.
So we can't assume them positive.?????

moreover que doesn't say that m and v are positive...
I'm not assuming anything.....
Join the discussion

by kshin78 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:34 am
[/quote]Why u r considering 'z' & 'm' as positive???
Consider
m= -4, z= -2

Now solve...

1) m-3z>0
-4 + 6 = 2, which is greater than 0

2) 4z-m<0
-8 +4 = -4, which is less than 0

doesn't value for m & z both satisfy 1 as well as 2

Now would u say that combining both statements we get both 'z' and 'm' as negative.
So we can't assume them positive.?????

moreover que doesn't say that m and v are positive...
I'm not assuming anything.....[/quote]


i'm so with you Suyog... i can't seem to figure it out...

the argument here is that m> 0 because z > 0. ok, true if z > 0, but WHY??? We can't assume that z > 0 when there are negative values that holds true for both equations.
Join the discussion