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.

positive integer n

Expert replies
by das.ashmita » Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:05 am
What is the positive integer n?

(1) For every positive integer m, the product m(m + 1)(m + 2) ... (m + n) is divisible by 16
(2) n^2 - 9n + 20 = 0

OA in the source is C

But I think its E
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by anuprajan5 » Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:16 am
Ashmita,

The answer is C

Statement 1 - m(m=1)(m=2)....(m+n) is divisible by 16. Since these are consecutive integers, I only need a couple of even integers to make it divisible by 16.

For example, 1,2,3,4,5,6 - In this case n is 5
22,23,24 - In this case n is 2.
Insufficient

Statement 2 - This gives us 2 values of n ie: 5 and 4. Insufficient

Combining - we can find m is a series of consecutive integers where n is 5. Just to contradict the case, you can check if you can get a series of 5 consecutive numbers where n is 4. I didn't find one.


Regards
Anup
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:00 am
das.ashmita wrote:What is the positive integer n?

(1) For every positive integer m, the product m(m + 1)(m + 2) ... (m + n) is divisible by 16
(2) n^2 - 9n + 20 = 0

OA in the source is C

But I think its E
Statement 1: For every positive integer m, the product m(m + 1)(m + 2) ... (m + n) is divisible by 16
Since m is positive, m(m+1)(m+2)...(m+n) represents the product of CONSECUTIVE positive integers.
Every other consecutive EVEN integer is a MULTIPLE OF 4.
Thus, if the product includes 3 consecutive EVEN factors, there are two cases:

Case 1: (multiple of 2)(multiple of 4)(multiple of 2)
This product must be divisible by (2)(4)(2) = 16.

Case 2: (multiple of 4)(multiple of 2)(multiple of 4)
This product must be divisible by (4)(2)(4) = 32.

In each case, the product is divisible by 16.
Thus, if the product includes at least 3 consecutive even factors, it will be divisible by 16.

To GUARANTEE that the product will include at least 3 consecutive even factors, the MINIMUM value of n is 5:
m(m+1)(m+2)(m+3)(m+4)(m+5) = the product of 6 consecutive integers.
This product will be composed of exactly 3 consecutive odd factors and exactly 3 consecutive even factors.

If n=4 -- implying a total of 5 consecutive factors -- then the product could be (odd)(even)(odd)(even)(odd).
In this case, the product will not include at least 3 consecutive even factors, with the result that it might not be divisible by 16.
To illustrate:
Neither 1*2*3*4*5 nor 17*18*19*20*21 is divisible by 16.

Since the product must include at least 3 consecutive even factors to GUARANTEE that it will be divisible by 16, n≥5.
No way to determine the exact value of n.
INSUFFICIENT.

Statement 2: n² - 9n + 20 = 0
(n-4)(n-5) = 0.
Since it's possible that n=4 or n=5, INSUFFICIENT.

Statements 1 and 2 combined:
Only n=5 satisfies both statements.
SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is C.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion

by Anurag@Gurome » Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:15 pm
das.ashmita wrote:What is the positive integer n?

(1) For every positive integer m, the product m(m + 1)(m + 2) ... (m + n) is divisible by 16
(2) n^2 - 9n + 20 = 0

OA in the source is C

But I think its E
Statement 1: Implies the product of any (n + 1) consecutive positive integers is divisible by 16. Now the product of any 6 or more consecutive integers is always divisible by 16. Hence, (n + 1) ≥ 6 => n ≥ 5

Not sufficient

Statement 2: n² - 9n + 20 = 0
=> (n - 4)(n - 5) = 0
Hence, n = 4 or n = 5

Not sufficient

1 & 2 Together: As n ≥ 5, n must be equal to 5.

Sufficient

The correct answer is C.
Anurag Mairal, Ph.D., MBA
GMAT Expert, Admissions and Career Guidance
Gurome, Inc.
1-800-566-4043 (USA)

Join Our Facebook Groups
GMAT with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/272466352793633/
Admissions with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/461459690536574/
Career Advising with Gurome
https://www.facebook.com/groups/360435787349781/
Join the discussion

by das.ashmita » Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:16 am
Thankyou Anurag , Mitch and Anup for replying.

I got confused in statement 1

case 1 : let m=2
2*3*4*5*6 is divisible by 16
Here n = 6-2 = 4

case 2 : let consider m=1
1*2*3*4*5*6 is divisible by 16
here n = 6-1 = 5

Can u please tell me what is wrong in assuming case 1
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:15 am
das.ashmita wrote:Thankyou Anurag , Mitch and Anup for replying.

I got confused in statement 1

case 1 : let m=2
2*3*4*5*6 is divisible by 16
Here n = 6-2 = 4

case 2 : let consider m=1
1*2*3*4*5*6 is divisible by 16
here n = 6-1 = 5

Can u please tell me what is wrong in assuming case 1
You have cited ONE CASE in which n=4 yields a product divisible by 16.
But statement 1 requires that the product be divisible by 16 FOR EVERY positive integer m.
If m=1 and n=4, the resulting product is 1*2*3*4*5, which is not divisible by 16.
Thus, n=4 does NOT satisfy the condition that the product be divisible by 16 FOR EVERY positive integer m.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion

by das.ashmita » Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:19 am
thanks Mitch!!absolutely clear now :)
Join the discussion