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.

In New York there has been an explosion of public interest i

Expert replies
by shagalo » Thu Jun 19, 2014 5:19 pm
In New York there has been an explosion of public interest in, and talent moving toward, internet startups over the last 5 years. The evidence of this explosion is that of the 100 or so internet startups currently active in the "New York Tech Meetup Group," 90 were founded over the course of the last 3 years.

The reasoning above assumes which one of the following?

(A)All of the 100 internet startups are commercially viable options.

(B)There were fewer than 90 internet startups that had been active 5 years ago and that ceased operations during the last 5 years.

(C)There has not been a corresponding increase in the number of startups devoted to other sectors such as fashion, pharmaceutical, and semiconductors.

(D)The percentage of college graduates going into computer related fields has increased over the past 5 years.

(E)The 90 most recently founded companies were all established as a result of creative energy on the part of young new talent

B
Last edited by shagalo on Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by [email protected] » Thu Jun 19, 2014 5:33 pm
Hi shagalo,

This CR prompt is "thin", meaning that it does not offer us much information to work with. Thus, whatever information that we DO have will be pivotal to answering the question.

The Facts:
-100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group"
-90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years.

The Conclusion:
-In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years.

The Logic:
For the above scenario to be considered "an EXPLOSION" of interest, then there should be a comparable scenario that was NOT an explosion. The "margin" for defining an "explosion" in this prompt is 90 internet startups in 5 years (notice how the conclusion mentions 5 years while the evidence mentions 3 years; we have to focus on what the conclusion emphasizes).

The question asks us for an assumption based on the above logic. We don't have much to work with, so I'd be looking for anything that "fits" the above logic. The only answer that touches on the same ideas is answer B. None of the other answers is relevant to the prompt.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image
Join the discussion

by shagalo » Thu Jun 19, 2014 5:48 pm
[email protected] wrote:Hi shagalo,

This CR prompt is "thin", meaning that it does not offer us much information to work with. Thus, whatever information that we DO have will be pivotal to answering the question.

The Facts:
-100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group"
-90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years.

The Conclusion:
-In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years.

The Logic:
For the above scenario to be considered "an EXPLOSION" of interest, then there should be a comparable scenario that was NOT an explosion. The "margin" for defining an "explosion" in this prompt is 90 internet startups in 5 years (notice how the conclusion mentions 5 years while the evidence mentions 3 years; we have to focus on what the conclusion emphasizes).

The question asks us for an assumption based on the above logic. We don't have much to work with, so I'd be looking for anything that "fits" the above logic. The only answer that touches on the same ideas is answer B. None of the other answers is relevant to the prompt.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
thanks for taking the time to answer my question. But it is still not clear for me. how can i relate the answer to the passage.
i know that there are 2 types of assumption questions: 1- fill the gap, 2- cause effect.
this is not the cause effect type.so how can the correct answer fill that gap ??

Premise 1: 100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group"
Premise 2: 90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years.

Conclusion :In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years.

i noticed that the premise mention 3 years and the conclusion mentioned 5 years but still i can figure out how to connect the answer to the gap.
Join the discussion

by [email protected] » Thu Jun 19, 2014 5:55 pm
Hi shagalo,

To use your terminology, the "gap" is in explaining what "an EXPLOSION" really means. If there's a RECENT EXPLOSION (in the last 5 years), then what was the situation BEFORE there was an explosion? The prompt defines "90 startups in 3 years" as an explosion, so I have to assume that "FEWER than 90" would NOT be an explosion. Furthermore, I'd assume that there were fewer than 90 before this latest explosion occurred.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image
Join the discussion

by David@VeritasPrep » Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:17 pm
This question is almost identical to another assumption question that is in the Veritas Critical Reasoning Book.

I have written a feature article about that question and how to approach it. Please read it and you will see what we are looking for from this assumption question.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2012/06/ ... -an-expert
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Join the discussion