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.

GRANT Research Institute publication

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:10 amFollowed by: 1 member
by psm12se » Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:03 am
The GRANT Research Institute recently published a report saying that legalizing the illegal drug dullnic in the state of Fruitland would not substantially decrease the revenue or operations of illegal drug traffickers. In the report, GRANT stated that even though legal dullnic would be of a higher quality and lower cost than illegal dullnic, sales of dullnic within Fruitland accounted for a small percentage of overall dullnic sales. Proponents of dullnic legalization point out that the GRANT Institute's logic is flawed because it fails to take into account that


A. Legally grown dullnic in Fruitland will be sold in other states in the region.

B. Once dullnic is legalized, people will try to legalize other drugs that are currently illegally trafficked.

C.Other research institutes have also studied this issue and come to different conclusions.

D. If it becomes legal to grow dullnic, people will stop buying dullnic from dealers.

E. Illegal drug traffickers will be able to legally grow dullnic within Fruitland's borders.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:13 amFollowed by: 4 members
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Thanked: 16 times
GMAT Score:650

by tisrar02 » Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:03 pm
IMO- E-> If the cost is lower and the drug is legal, those dealers will grow in state for cheaper and thus not substantially decrease rev from dealers.

A- Other states doesn't matter, were talking about the dealers
B- Other drugs, not relevant
C- Not relevant
D- We can not conclude that other people will STOP buying from dealers

OA and Source????
Dedication is what leads to success...
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:57 pmFollowed by: 3 members
Thanked: 6 times

by himu » Sun Feb 10, 2013 11:44 pm
+ 1 for E for same reason mentioned above.
OA & course pls ?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 amFollowed by: 14 members
Thanked: 46 times

by aditya8062 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:43 pm
my take would be B
we need a reason as why GRANT Institute's logic is flawed .the conclusion of grant institute is : that that legalizing the illegal drug dullnic in the state of Fruitland would not substantially decrease the revenue or operations of illegal drug traffickers .it never says revenue and operation of illegal drug traffickers of dullnic .so if we cite a reason that doing something with this one drug will motivate people to try to legalize other drugs then the overall revenue an operations of illegal drugs will be affected .this is what B does
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 amFollowed by: 14 members
Thanked: 46 times

by aditya8062 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:38 pm
plz share the OA
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 451
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:58 amFollowed by: 120 members
Location: New York City
Thanked: 188 times
GMAT Score:770

by Tommy Wallach » Sun Feb 24, 2013 12:18 pm
Hey Guys,

This seems like a pretty weird question, but (E) does win.

Conclusion: Legalizing dullnic will not hurt revenues of illegal drug folks
Premise: Sales of dullnic within Fruitland are small amount of sales

(A) seems plausible. GRANT concludes that even if the legal replaces the illegal, it doesn't matter, because Fruitland is small. But if that dullnic is sold elsewhere, it could hurt the revenues of illegal drug folks all over the place. However, we don't know if dullnic is already legal in other places, so we still wouldn't be hurting other illegal drug folks.

(B) "Trying" doesn't matter. If they succeeded, that might hurt drug dealers revenues, but we don't know that.

(C) This is silly, as we don't even know what the other conclusions are!

(D) This might be tempting, but it would still only affect Fruitland, which is a small part of sales.

(E) If illegal drug traffickers from other places can start growing it legally in Fruitland, then it could hurt overall sales of illegal dullnic.

Not a great question to my mind. Where's it from?

-t
Tommy Wallach, Company Expert
ManhattanGMAT

If you found this posting mega-helpful, feel free to thank and/or follow me!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:10 amFollowed by: 1 member

by psm12se » Sat Mar 02, 2013 9:19 am
Source: Grockit
Answer : E
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 11:09 amFollowed by: 7 members
Thanked: 1 times

by Soumita Ghosh » Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:14 pm
Hey Tommy

I choose A. It never came in my mind that E can be answer!!

As for option A we are saying that we do not know whether dullnic is already legal in other places, so we still wouldn't be hurting other illegal drug folks. Same as for option E also we can say that we do not know whether dullnic is already legal in other places, so we still wouldn't be hurting other illegal drug folks .

Can you give anymore good reason to eliminate A and keep E.?

Thanks a lot !! :)
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1