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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

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

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.

Legal Services

Expert replies
by blaster » Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:55 am
At Legal Services, LLC last year, the average annual salary for attorneys was $75,000, while the average salary for paralegals was $50,000. The average annual salary for all Legal Services, LLC employees was $45,000.

If the information above is correct, which one of the following conclusions can properly be drawn on the basis of it?
A. There were twice as many attorneys at Legal Services, LLC as there were paralegals last year.
B. There were more paralegals than attorneys at Legal Services, LLC last year.
C. There were two attorneys and three paralegals at Legal Services, LLC last year.
D. There was at least one Legal Services, LLC employee who earned less than the average paralegal earned last year.
E. At least one paralegal made less than $50,000 last year.


[spoiler]Can someone please tell me ,what's wrong with B ?[/spoiler]
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by rohu27 » Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:22 am
option D -> as the avg of both X and Y is > thn the total company's avg, thr must be some number of people who earn less than 50k to bring the avg dwn to 45k.

B - it can very well be tht there is only one X and one Y or 3 X, 2 Y - this cant be concluded frm the info given.
any specific doubt abt B?
Join the discussion

by VivianKerr » Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:26 am
Hey blaster,

Here's how I broke it down:

Conclusion: Avg. annual salary for ALL employees was $45,000

Evidence: avg sal attorneys is $75,000, and avg. sal paralegals is $50,000

Assumptions: Average = Total Sum / # of terms, so the average of the attorneys and the paralegals together would be $60,000. Since the average salary is less than that, then there must be significant # of employees who are making less than $45,000.

Question Rephrase: What is TRUE based on the evidence?

Prediction: There must be some more poorly-paid employees.

The answer is D.

B is incorrect because it does not HAVE to be true that there were more paralegals than attorneys. There could be the exact same number of paralegals as attorneys. What is weighting the average down to $45,000 is the fact that there is an unaccounted for number of employees making LESS than what the paralegals make.
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles

Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]

Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"! :-)
Join the discussion

by shweta.kalra » Sat Apr 23, 2011 11:18 pm
@ vivann kerr - how do we get the average = 60000 of paralegals and atorrneys as per u say.
plz clarify
thnks
Join the discussion

by VivianKerr » Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:43 am
@swweta We are told that the average of the attorneys is $75,000 and the avg. of the paralegals is $50,000.

I used the average formula:

Average = Total sum / # of terms

Average = 75,000 + 50,000 / 2

Average = $60,000

Another way to think of it is that 60,000 is exactly halfway between 75,000 and 50,000.

But since we are told the ACTUAL average is 45,000, then there must be other employees who make less money and are this weighing the total average down.
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles

Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]

Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"! :-)
Join the discussion

by Testluv » Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:51 pm
VivianKerr wrote:@swweta We are told that the average of the attorneys is $75,000 and the avg. of the paralegals is $50,000.

I used the average formula:

Average = Total sum / # of terms

Average = 75,000 + 50,000 / 2

Average = $60,000

Another way to think of it is that 60,000 is exactly halfway between 75,000 and 50,000.

But since we are told the ACTUAL average is 45,000, then there must be other employees who make less money and are this weighing the total average down.
Note that we can't actually use the average formula in this way because we don't know that the contributions of the two groups are equal. If the ratio (of the number of attorneys to the number of paralegals) is anything other than 1:1, we would have to use the weighted average formula.

(Also, 60 is NOT exactly halfway between 75 and 50). :)

But this:
But since we are told the ACTUAL average is 45,000, then there must be other employees who make less money and are this weighing the total average down.
is absolutely correct, and is in fact the key deduction. If the average of ALL employees is less than that of both attorneys and paralegals, then there must be some remaining (and lower-earning!) employees to compensate.

Finally, I would just point out that in an inference question, there is little value in dividing the text into conclusion and evidence; better to treat the whole passage as true information (i.e., as evidence).
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Join the discussion