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.

MANHANTAN CR, PLS, HELP, EXPERT, MEMBER.

Expert replies
by tanviet » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:27 am
MANHANTAN CR IS VERY HARD AND NICE AND IS SIMILAR THE TO HARDEST QUESTIONS IN GMATPREP.

At the beginning of 1994, Congress enacted a 10% increase in the federal minimum wage. At that time, Charlesville Hotdog and Beef Company employed 4,000 employees, with over 90 percent of the workforce making minimum wage. Despite the fact that the increase in minimum wage increased the operating expenses of Charlesville Co., the company reported record profits at the end of 1994.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox?

-Charlesville Co. spends more money procuring cows for their Hotdog and Beef products than they do paying their 4,000 workers.
-Charlesville Co. also saw an increase in expenses other than its wages in 1994.
-Before 1994, the company had considered giving its employees a 10% raise, but ultimately decided not to do so.
-The company's customer base is made up primarily of families that rely on minimum wage incomes.
-The majority of the company's 4,000 employees work in the company's meat-packing facilities.

step 1, read and understand argument 30 second
step 2, eliminate 3 choices, 30 seconds
step 3 when there are 2 choice left, read argument again and choose correct

I can go to A and D. which is correct. I see both are correct
In A, it is possible that cost of cow is lower and weakening happen
in D is is possible that customer spent more when they have more money.
In both 2 cases, possibility exist, not actual action happens so both are correct.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Ilana@EconomistGMAT » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:40 am
The correct answer choice is D. The paradox to be resolved is how could the company have increased its profits if it must pay higher wages to employees, and hence has higher expenses. This type of paradox question revolves on the following formula:

Profits = Revenues - Costs

If the profits went up and the costs went up, for the company to have kept up its profits implies that means the revenues must have gone up. We search for an answer choice that shows us that revenues went up. D tells us that the customer base is comprised of people who earn minimum wage. As a result of the higher wage, we can infer that the customer base had more expendable income and therefore spent more on hotdog and beef products leading to increased revenues for the company which offset the increase in the cost of higher wages.
Join the discussion

by mundasingh123 » Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:55 am
Hey is this Cr from MGMAT CAT or MGMAT CR Guide
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Join the discussion

by XLogic » Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:05 pm
Still learning on the job... but one thing I've found useful on CR is paying attention to the "degree of provability" required for each question.

"must be true" vs. "most probably inferred"
"justifies..." vs. "most helps"

The First requires 100% provability, the second may only require 10% provability.
I struggle more with the latter because I often get stuck trying to prove close-to-100%!!

I think this question is an example of providing less than 100% proof. (D) is correct even though it does not absolutely resolve the paradox; i.e., Just because customers income increased does not necessarily mean that customers spent more to increase company's revenue. Even if we accept that customers spent more, they could have spent their extra cash on shoes!!

But (D) most helps to resolve the paradox because it gives us the best option (out of A thru E) to explain increased profit due to increased revenue.

--> Note to self ... :-)
my post helped --> thank me!
don't thank me --> my post = what the..??
Join the discussion

by ArpanaAmishi » Tue Aug 16, 2011 3:52 am
Ilana@MasterGMAT wrote:The correct answer choice is D. The paradox to be resolved is how could the company have increased its profits if it must pay higher wages to employees, and hence has higher expenses. This type of paradox question revolves on the following formula:

Profits = Revenues - Costs

If the profits went up and the costs went up, for the company to have kept up its profits implies that means the revenues must have gone up. We search for an answer choice that shows us that revenues went up. D tells us that the customer base is comprised of people who earn minimum wage. As a result of the higher wage, we can infer that the customer base had more expendable income and therefore spent more on hotdog and beef products leading to increased revenues for the company which offset the increase in the cost of higher wages.
How to rule this out .....'Before 1994, the company had considered giving its employees a 10% raise, but ultimately decided not to do so.'
Join the discussion

by ArpanaAmishi » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:20 am
someone help pls
Join the discussion

by killer1387 » Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:53 am
hey,
Option C is just irrelevant and doesnt affects the paradox, besides correct option resolves the paradox considering/attending both sides of the argument and IMO it does nothing here. So, it can be ruled out.
Join the discussion