BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
x/y < b/c ?
Source: Beat The GMAT — Data Sufficiency |
Hi LalaB!LalaB wrote:x/y < b/c can be written as xc <by . it is the same as the 1st stmnt (cx-yb<0 or cx<0+by cx<by)
This is true ONLY if we know that C & Y have the same signs (if only one is negative, then the signs will switch direction).
In fact, this is a pretty tough problem. From the stem we actually have a 2-step question:
Question Stem:
If we know that cy>0, then is xc<by?
If we know that cy<0, then is xc>by?
We have to know BOTH the relationship between xc and by, as well as the sign for cy.
Statement 1: cx < yb
We know that xc<by, but we don't know if cy>0... Not Sufficient.
Statement 2: bx < cy
If we know that bx<cy, that doesn't tell us about the xc<by relationship OR enable us to determine if cy is positive or negative... Not Sufficient.
Statement 1+2: cx < yb & bx < cy
The only real way to combine these is to stack and add and hope that something simplifies...
xc<by
+bx<cy
------
xc + bx < by + cy
x(b+c) < y(b+c)
So, if (b+c)>0, then x<y.
and if (b+c)<0, then x>y...
But this doesn't tell us the information me need to know...Not Sufficient.
**Picking Numbers**
I will warn you up front that picking numbers for this problem is fairly AWFUL (it took me a while to come up with sets of numbers for 4 variables that make the statements true, but then give both a Yes and a No answer to the question stem (proving insufficiency). But I will show you a few of those sets here.
Statement 1: cx < yb
Option 1: {b=-1, c=-1, x=6, y=2}
cx < yb --> (-1)(6)<(2)(-1) --> -6 < -2 Fits the constraint of the Statement.
Is x/y < b/c? 6/2<-1/-1 --> 3 < 1 NO!
Option 2: {b=-6, c=-2, x=1, y=-1}
cx < yb --> (-2)(1)<(-1)(-6) --> -2 < 6 Fits the constraint of the Statement.
Is x/y < b/c? --> 1/-1 < -6/-2 --> -1<3 YES!
Two different answers to the question...NOT Sufficient
Statement 2: bx < cy
Option 1: {b=-1, c=-1, x=6, y=2}
bx<cy --> (-1)(6)<(-1)(2) --> -6<-2 Fits the constraint of the Statement.
Is x/y < b/c? 6/2<-1/-1 --> 3<1 NO!
Option 2: {b=-6, c=-2, x=1, y=-1}
bx<cy --> (-6)(1)<(-2)(-1) --> -6<2 Fits the constraint of the Statement.
Is x/y < b/c? --> 1/-1 < -6/-2 --> -1<3 YES!
Two different answers to the question...NOT Sufficient
Statement 1+2: cx < yb & bx < cy
Notice that I used the same numbers for Options 1 and 2 when testing each statement. I did so because it saves me time when looking at them together. I can see that I have 2 sets of numbers that fit all of the Statement constraints, but they give me 2 different answers for the Question Stem... NOT Sufficient
Therefore, the correct answer is E.
Hope this clears up some of the confusion!
Whit
Whitney Garner
GMAT/GRE/EA Instructor & Anxiety/Accommodations Coach
www.whitneygarner.com
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Math is a lot like love - a simple idea that can easily get complicated
GMAT/GRE/EA Instructor & Anxiety/Accommodations Coach
www.whitneygarner.com
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Math is a lot like love - a simple idea that can easily get complicated
















