BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

(Triple vs 3 Times) In 2004, Burger King's revenue

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:08 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

(Triple vs 3 Times) In 2004, Burger King's revenue

by clawhammer » Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:35 am
In 2004, Burger King's revenue was estimated at nearly $17.4 million, accounting for 0.6 percent of total revenue for domestic fast food entries, triple the figure for 1999.

a) triple the figure for 1999
b) three times more than 1999
c) three times as much as 1999
d) triple the number that it was in 1999
e) a number triple that which occurred in 1999



Please help:
- Why is C incorrect?
- Tips on using triple vs three times on GMAT?

OA is [spoiler]A. Source: Grockit.[/spoiler]
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:36 am
As far as I believe this question is not pulling a fast on the split three times vs triple.

The reason for C being incorrect is that the sentence implies 17.4million is 3 times as much as 1999. But is it ? Is 17.4 million is 3 times of 1999 or 17.4 million is 3 times of the revenue it was in 1999? The later one is the obvious answer "17.4 million is 3 times of the revenue it was in 1999". This wrong comparison is followed in B and C. So wrong.

E is unnecessarily wordy and makes the sentence ambiguous.

Out of remaining two options A and D, D is incorrect because of the pronoun "it", which does not have a clear antecedent.

So Answer is A.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:08 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by clawhammer » Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:43 am
thanks. i see what you mean.

one thing that confused me is the usage:

"... figure for 1999"

- is for the correctly used here? or should it be of?
Top
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:47 am
clawhammer wrote:thanks. i see what you mean.

one thing that confused me is the usage:

"... figure for 1999"

- is for the correctly used here? or should it be of?
For is correctly used here. See the below sentence it may make sense....

The figure for the revenue of 1999.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:08 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by clawhammer » Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:52 am
isn't figure relating to revenue?

should i check it as:

... triple the revenue for 1999. - is this correct?
Top
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 6:19 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:24 members

by shovan85 » Sun Oct 10, 2010 4:10 am
clawhammer wrote:isn't figure relating to revenue?

should i check it as:

... triple the revenue for 1999. - is this correct?
Yes this is correct .. My mistake :) the word figure can be meant for the Revenue of 1999. I actually wanted to tell u that the word figure is used to clear the ambiguity what it refers to.
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1