heshamelaziry wrote:I will post 2 questions.

all the clients that company X had at the beginning of the year remained with the company for the whole year. If company X acquired new clients during the year, what was the ratio of the number of clients that company X had at the end of last year to hte number of clients that it had at the beginning of last year ?

(1) The ratio of the number of clients that company X had at the beginning of last year to the number of new clients that it acquired during the year was 12 to 1.

(2) Company X had 144 clients at the beginning of last year.

Okay, so the first question, your first approach should be to look at (2), becauase it is the much simpler choice to start with. just from looking at (2), you should be able to tell that it is insufficient alone.

Looking back to (1), it tells us that the the ratio of old to new clients is 12:1. SO, the ratio of clients at the end of the year to at the start is (x+y)/x,
where
x = # of clientss at the start of the year
y = # of added clients
so from this, we know that the ratio of total clients to original clients is (12+1)/12 or 13/12

so, we can tell that the answer is A from this.

heshamelaziry wrote: If xy ≠ 0, is x > y?

(1) 4x = 3y

(2) |y - x| = x - y

So what xy ≠ 0 tells us is that neither x or y is 0.
(1) is insufficient in my opinion. We're not told if x and y are integers, so they could be (-), (+), or fractions. Even if they were integers, they could still be any sort of + or - integers.
(2) Okay, so this is much more interesting. NOW, I say this because it means x-y>=0 because |y - x| will never be negative. this means if X is -, then y must be a larger - number, aka a lesser number. if x is a positive number, then y is either a negative or smaller positive number. OR, x and y are the same number, in that case, it is insufficient. so therefore, (2) is insufficient on its own.

now, just plugging (1) x = 3y/4 into (2), we see it says
|y - 3y/4| = 3y/4 -y
(1/4y) = -(1/4y)
y/2 = 0
or y=0

my instinct says the answer is C. plugging 1 into 2 tells us that the scenario where x=y doesn't come into existence. so this means that because x-y>=0 because |y - x| will never be negative, then x must be larger that y, but more specifically, that x and y are also both negative.

heshamelaziry wrote: However, for statement 1 to be correct OE says that: from statement 1 we can deduce that total number of clients at the end of the year is 13; deducing that: the number of clients company X had at the beginning of the year = 12 and the number of new clients is 1.

PLEASE LOOK AT THE NEXT QUESTION. IT SHOWS THAT THIS SAME LOGIC IS INCORRECT !!!!!!!


If xy ≠ 0, is x > y?

(1) 4x = 3y

(2) |y - x| = x - y


Statement 1 says that deducing that x/y = 3/4 is incorrect. Could you explain please ?

Sorry that I answered the questions and not specifically the questions you had. I am not sure why you think these are the same logic? for the first problem, do you understand why/how they got the 13?

Question: the OE saying that there are 13 clients is wrong imo, because what it should be is a multiple of 13. This is unless when they said ratio, they meant the 12 and 1 were the total for each. This is something I would appreciate if someone could clarify for me.

The math and the concepts behind those two questions are different imo. One is about proportions and the other is about number properties.

Talkativetree wrote:

heshamelaziry wrote: However, for statement 1 to be correct OE says that: from statement 1 we can deduce that total number of clients at the end of the year is 13; deducing that: the number of clients company X had at the beginning of the year = 12 and the number of new clients is 1.

PLEASE LOOK AT THE NEXT QUESTION. IT SHOWS THAT THIS SAME LOGIC IS INCORRECT !!!!!!!


If xy ≠ 0, is x > y?

(1) 4x = 3y

(2) |y - x| = x - y


Statement 1 says that deducing that x/y = 3/4 is incorrect. Could you explain please ?

Sorry that I answered the questions and not specifically the questions you had. I am not sure why you think these are the same logic? for the first problem, do you understand why/how they got the 13?

Question: the OE saying that there are 13 clients is wrong imo, because what it should be is a multiple of 13. This is unless when they said ratio, they meant the 12 and 1 were the total for each. This is something I would appreciate if someone could clarify for me.

The math and the concepts behind those two questions are different imo. One is about proportions and the other is about number properties.

I think i understand the 13/12 for the first one. But, they arrived at this assuming that x =12 and y =13. so althougth they are different math problems, the same concept was used in the first problem to reach an answer but in the second problem i could not assume that x =3 and y =4 ?????????????????? I don't know the difference. I don't see why I can do this in a ratio problem, but not in an inequality problem??????????????

I think i got it now!

ratios don't indicate a number for the variables, and can be added, subtracted,.... to solve. But with numbers it cannot be deduced that x = 3 and y = 4.

talkativetree did a great job.
I remember doing the first question a few days ago, and I believe I got A for an answer as well.

I just worked out the second question (out of curiosity) and got C for answer as well; the only way to satisfy both satements is when both x and y are negative #s (from both statements), and thak makes it x>y from statement (1). So "Yes" to the question asked. I almost went for B while doing (2), then as talkative pointed out, I realized that there's a possibility that x=y, you know, which statement (1) eliminated.

btw good luck on your gmat. I feel your pain, man. habng in there...I myself will take that darn thangy pretty soon...