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
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 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
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

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

BTG Coordinate Geo

Expert replies
by yellowho » Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:18 pm
In the coordinate plane, line A is defined by the equation 3x+2y=k, and line B is defined by the
equation jx-y=-7. At what point do the two lines intersect?

(1) Line A passes through the point (0,7)
(2) Line B passes through the point (3,1)

Can someone explain why it's A? You still don't know j
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by Rahul@gurome » Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:46 pm
(1) Since line A passes through (0, 7). So 3(0) + 2(7) = k implies k = 14.
Adding 3x + 2y = 14 and 2jx - 2y = -14, we get (3 + 2j)x = 0, which implies x = 0 and y = 7
So, the two lines intersect at (0, 7). SUFFICIENT.

(2) Since line B passes through the point (3,1), so 3j - 1 = -7 implies j = -2
Adding 3x + 3y = k and -6x - 3y = -21, we get -3x = k - 21, which cannot be solved.
Hence, NOT SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is A.

Does that help?
Rahul Lakhani
Quant Expert
Gurome, Inc.
https://www.GuroMe.com
On MBA sabbatical (at ISB) for 2011-12 - will stay active as time permits
1-800-566-4043 (USA)
+91-99201 32411 (India)
Join the discussion

by yellowho » Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:54 pm
What's your rationale for adding? I know it works fine but, I didn't "See" the reason to add since you can't eliminate the variable. What's the key takeaway here? The answer is obvious now but only because j cannot be -3/2. I guess, can you walk me through your thought process and why you knew that adding together would work? Traditional algebra would indicate that you can't eliminate j so I didn't even bother adding.
Join the discussion

by Rahul@gurome » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:01 am
yellowho wrote:What's your rationale for adding? I know it works fine but, I didn't "See" the reason to add since you can't eliminate the variable. What's the key takeaway here? The answer is obvious now but only because j cannot be -3/2. I guess, can you walk me through your thought process and why you knew that adding together would work? Traditional algebra would indicate that you can't eliminate j so I didn't even bother adding.
When we look at the 2 equations, we can observe that by adding the 2 equations the 'y' term and the 'constant term' are cancelled. This is the main reason we added the equations here.
Rahul Lakhani
Quant Expert
Gurome, Inc.
https://www.GuroMe.com
On MBA sabbatical (at ISB) for 2011-12 - will stay active as time permits
1-800-566-4043 (USA)
+91-99201 32411 (India)
Join the discussion

by yellowho » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:11 am
But you still have j and x. Algebraically, its not that helpful. It's only helpful if you know that j cannot be the same as the slope in the original line. How did you solve it? Did you say (3+2j)x=0 X= 0 or 3+2j=0 thus J=-3/2 since j cannot be -3/2 then x must be zero. Or did you some how know based on some property. I guess how did you avoid falling into the C trap?. I was thinking of combining originally by saw 3 variables and 2 equation and stopped.
Join the discussion

by Rahul@gurome » Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:53 am
yellowho wrote:I was thinking of combining originally by saw 3 variables and 2 equation and stopped.
The "rules" of algebras like "more unknown than equations can't be solved" etc are applicable only when there is n other information is available. When we have other data, why don't we try to use them rather than blindly following the rules?
yellowho wrote:Algebraically, its not that helpful. It's only helpful if you know that j cannot be the same as the slope in the original line. How did you solve it? Did you say (3+2j)x=0 X= 0 or 3+2j=0 thus J=-3/2 since j cannot be -3/2 then x must be zero. Or did you some how know based on some property.
If you take j = -3/2, then the equation of two lines will be same and they will coincide on each other, i.e. the two lines will intersect at infinite number of points. Thus from statement 1 we conclude either the lines intersect at point (0, 7) or at infinite number of points which includes point (0, 7) too. Hence in any case they are intersecting at point (0, 7).

Here is another approach you may find useful:
  • The Equation for line B is jx - y = -7
    Rearranging, y = jx + 7
    Thus, only the slope of the line B depends on j.
    But we know the y-intercept of line B, which is equal to 7.
    Hence B always passes through (0, 7) and we conclude it from the question stem itself.

    Now statement 1 is clearly sufficient.
Rahul Lakhani
Quant Expert
Gurome, Inc.
https://www.GuroMe.com
On MBA sabbatical (at ISB) for 2011-12 - will stay active as time permits
1-800-566-4043 (USA)
+91-99201 32411 (India)
Join the discussion