Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
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.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

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

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 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
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
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
GMATOnDemandStart 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

M+Z>0

Expert replies
by saege » Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:37 am
How to solve this Q?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by rhymes_with_luck » Sun Aug 10, 2008 7:35 am
once you rule out 1 and 2 independently and combine them,

what you get is

1) 4z>m>3z

2) by adding two inequalities

z>0

hence m>0

and m+z>0

C
Join the discussion

by saege » Sun Aug 10, 2008 7:47 am
rhymes_with_luck wrote:
z>0
How come z>0
Join the discussion

by rhymes_with_luck » Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:09 pm
add ineq 1 and ineq 2
Join the discussion

by sumanal » Mon Aug 11, 2008 6:00 am
From what i could make out..

1. says m>3z.. in which case either of m or z or both can be negative.

same is the case with statement 2.

If u consider both the statements..

m>3z but m<4z
this can happen only when both the variables are positve because when z is negative for ex: -3 ..there exists no solution for m which will be
>-9 but <-12 so for the inequality to hold true.. z should be positve n therefore m also positve.
and hence the addition of 2 positive numbers positive :)

Hope that gave a better insight.
Join the discussion

by gmattester » Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:33 pm
Can someone plz. help me understand this problem
If m-3z>0
Then m>3z only if m and z are positive.
And m<3z if m and z are negative
So 1st is insufficient

2) Similarly for 2nd
4z>m only if m and z are positive
Else 4z<m

Now combining 1 and 2 we get
3z<m<4z

Now m and z can be positive as well as negative
So how we reached conclusion that m+z>0

Also I am not sure this is right way to solve this problem
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:02 pm
gmattester wrote:Can someone plz. help me understand this problem
If m-3z>0
Then m>3z only if m and z are positive.
And m<3z if m and z are negative
If m-3z > 0, then m > 3z. It does not matter whether m and z are positive or negative. We're only adding 3z to both sides of the inequality here, and you never need to worry about reversing an inequality when you add or subtract the same quantity on both sides.

I expect you're thinking about multiplying (or dividing) on both sides of an inequality- if you multiply or divide by a negative, you must reverse the inequality.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

by parallel_chase » Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:07 pm
gmattester wrote: Now combining 1 and 2 we get
3z<m<4z

Now m and z can be positive as well as negative
So how we reached conclusion that m+z>0

Also I am not sure this is right way to solve this problem
if you combine I & II
m-3z>0
4z-m>0

If you add these two inequalities

m-3z+4z-m>0
-3z+4z>0
z>0

if z > 0, then m will also be greater than 0 because m>3z

Hence m+z>0, answer is C.

Always remember the following rule for inequalities.

1. Inequalities can only be added to each other, they cannot be subtracted.

2. When adding two inequalities, the signs of both the inequalities should be in the same direction.

Like we did in this case.

Hope this helps. Let me know if you still have any problems.
Join the discussion

by Suyog » Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:52 pm
Join the discussion

by gmattester » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:21 pm
Ian Stewart wrote:
gmattester wrote:Can someone plz. help me understand this problem
If m-3z>0
Then m>3z only if m and z are positive.
And m<3z if m and z are negative
If m-3z > 0, then m > 3z. It does not matter whether m and z are positive or negative. We're only adding 3z to both sides of the inequality here, and you never need to worry about reversing an inequality when you add or subtract the same quantity on both sides.

I expect you're thinking about multiplying (or dividing) on both sides of an inequality- if you multiply or divide by a negative, you must reverse the inequality.
Thanks Ian. I read one of your post where it was x/y>1 and you explained this reversing an inequality thing. So I applied same concept here but forgot this rule is only true for multiplication and division. Thanks for clearing that.
Join the discussion

by gmattester » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:23 pm
parallel_chase wrote:
gmattester wrote: Now combining 1 and 2 we get
3z<m<4z

Now m and z can be positive as well as negative
So how we reached conclusion that m+z>0

Also I am not sure this is right way to solve this problem
if you combine I & II
m-3z>0
4z-m>0

If you add these two inequalities

m-3z+4z-m>0
-3z+4z>0
z>0

if z > 0, then m will also be greater than 0 because m>3z

Hence m+z>0, answer is C.

Always remember the following rule for inequalities.

1. Inequalities can only be added to each other, they cannot be subtracted.

2. When adding two inequalities, the signs of both the inequalities should be in the same direction.

Like we did in this case.

Hope this helps. Let me know if you still have any problems.
Thanks chase.........
Now it is more clear to me.
Join the discussion

by codesnooker » Wed Aug 20, 2008 7:28 pm
Suyog, the link that you have given, in that post, the question is wrongly posted. Check again the inequalities sign for the second statement.

And yes answer (C) is correct answer.
Join the discussion