-
thegmatbeater
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:21 am
BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
inequality
Source: Beat The GMAT — Data Sufficiency |
IMO it is B.
Please let me know OA.
my approach.
We gotta prove is x-y>x+y ?
i.e. is -y>y
stmt 2 SUFF.
regards,
Please let me know OA.
my approach.
We gotta prove is x-y>x+y ?
i.e. is -y>y
stmt 2 SUFF.
regards,
Cubicle Bound Misfit
When you multiply an inequality, you need to be certain of the sign. If x+y is negative, the sign is reversed.... so I don't think you can do this since we can't be sure of the sign.cubicle_bound_misfit wrote:We gotta prove is x-y>x+y
Would be interested in the OA though. I need a methodical way of working this one out!
I think "cubicle_bound_misfit" i correct in solving the eqn.
The eqn can be reduced to 2y < 0 or y <0
so answer shld be B .
Pls correct me if I am going fundamentally wrong in soloving the equation.
The eqn can be reduced to 2y < 0 or y <0
so answer shld be B .
Pls correct me if I am going fundamentally wrong in soloving the equation.
I think jsl brings up a good point to remember about signs and direction of inequality when cross multiplying. But I also agree with some of the other posters and think B is sufficient.
To simplify the "rephrase" of the questions stem asks: "Is y>0 or is y<0?" (factoring in that the unknown signs can flip the inequality)
1) tells us nothing about y - insufficient
2) tells us y<0 - SUFFICIENT
To simplify the "rephrase" of the questions stem asks: "Is y>0 or is y<0?" (factoring in that the unknown signs can flip the inequality)
1) tells us nothing about y - insufficient
2) tells us y<0 - SUFFICIENT
hi JSL,
the way I tried it
if x-y/x+y is > 1 then both denominator and numerator both has to be either greater than zero or less than zero.
in both the cases if you pick numbers , multiplying expression by denominator does not invert ineqalities.
Please let me know if I am wrong and what's the OA?
regards,
the way I tried it
if x-y/x+y is > 1 then both denominator and numerator both has to be either greater than zero or less than zero.
in both the cases if you pick numbers , multiplying expression by denominator does not invert ineqalities.
Please let me know if I am wrong and what's the OA?
regards,
Cubicle Bound Misfit
Actually I'm rethinking this going back through it with a common sense check by picking some numbers... maybe I've overthought the problem by trying to solve it with algebra
Maybe 2) y<0 isn't so sufficient after all.
Consider x=3, y=-1
Stem eqn will equal 2 which is a "YES" answer
Consider x=3, y=-4
Stem eqn will equal -1 which is a "NO" answer
Statement 1) suffers the same conclusion, as well as the statements together.
Could E be the answer after all?
Maybe 2) y<0 isn't so sufficient after all.
Consider x=3, y=-1
Stem eqn will equal 2 which is a "YES" answer
Consider x=3, y=-4
Stem eqn will equal -1 which is a "NO" answer
Statement 1) suffers the same conclusion, as well as the statements together.
Could E be the answer after all?
















