algebra

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:16 pm

algebra

by itwazthe60s » Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:01 pm
This question's from Veritas Prep's textbook, but I think their answer is wrong.

At the beginning of the year, a clothing boutique had no jeans in stock. Early in the year, the boutique purchased 500 pairs of jeans, which had cost the boutique $65 each. During the same year, the boutique made only one other lot purchase of jeans. What was the total amount spent by the boutique on the jeans it had in stock at the end of the year?

1) During the year the total revenue from the sale of clothes was $250,000.
2) During the same year the boutique purchased 700 pairs of jeans for $60 each.

[spoiler]OA is E, but I think it's B.[/spoiler]

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 5:46 am
Thanked: 2 times

by anujan007 » Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:11 am
Well, even I thought the answer might be B, but on revaluation, I think the question asked is misleading. It asks us for amount spent on jeans in stock and not about the amount spent on the stock of jeans brought by the firm. Both the options 1 & 2 do not specify anything about the sales of the jeans (quantity / amount earned by sales of jeans). Hence, both the options together are insufficient to answer the question which is about the amount of jeans left in stock. Thus the answer should be E.

I hope the above reasoning is correct.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:21 am
Great reasoning, anujan007!

And here's where the question is NOT misleading - statement 1 clearly demonstrates that the value of the jeans in stock at the end of the year will NOT equal the total value of the jeans purchased. Statement 1 explicitly introduces the fact that the store did sell some of its jeans.

There's an important Data Sufficiency strategy behind this (which is one of the reasons that this question is featured so early on in that textbook), which we call "Why Are You Here?". If a statement alone is nowhere near sufficient - in this case, the revenue from jeans sold seemingly has nothing to do with the cost of jeans purchased - you MUST ask yourself why the author wrote that statement. Think about it - the author only gets to write two statements...she will never throw one away. Either that statement introduces essential information relevant to the other statement (in this case, it proves that statement 2 is not sufficient, because the jeans in stock at the end of the year are not 500 + 700...some of those jeans have been sold, and we don't know which ones) or that statement is a trap - it's trying to make you think you need that information when you actually already know it. But either way, if a statement seems utterly useless on its own, your challenge is to determine why the author wrote it.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:16 pm

by itwazthe60s » Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:19 pm
Thanks for replying Brian. Just to make sure that I understand what you're saying:

Although the statement 1 is insufficient, it confirms that a certain number of jeans were indeed sold, making the "stock at the end of the year" less than 500 (stem) + 700 (statement 2). Therefore, the 700 jeans at $60 each in statement 2 does not give us the end of the year stock, making statement 2 also insufficient.

What if statement 1 was deleted, and the stem was only accompanied by statement 2. Would statement 2 alone be sufficient? (Basically, what if we're never told that any sales were made and the boutique purchased two batches of jeans, one at 500 and the other at 700?)

Thanks again for your help.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:24 pm
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:6 members

by navami » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:26 pm
Ans must be E. as we do not know the selling price of the jeans.
This time no looking back!!!
Navami

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Wed Aug 31, 2011 8:55 am
Hey 60s,

Great question. And, you know, I don't think that they would ever ask the same question without statement 1. Statement 1 makes the question "fair" and a little challenging - it gives that hint that the amount of inventory purchased is not necessarily the amount of inventory in stock. Without that nod to the potential for sales, statement 2 is still not sufficient but more in that "gotcha" way of "did you ever think about how many they might have sold?".

Even as it is, we still haven't accounted for:

-Loss due to theft
-Damage due to moths
-Jeans that were ruined by slob customers who tried them on and spilled drinks or condiments on them
-Jeans that were accidentally thrown out during mannequin clothes changes
-Etc.

So statement 2 alone isn't sufficient - there are plenty of reasons that jeans purchased by the store wouldn't be in stock at the end of the month. But those reasons above (sloppy customers, moths, mannequin changes) aren't "fair", so I don't think the GMAT could create a legitimate question without suggesting a reason that the jeans purchased don't necessarily equal the jeans in stock. Remember - the GMAT tests these questions pretty thoroughly through those "unscored, experimental" questions, and if too many 700+ scorers miss a 550-level question they need to rework it or throw it out. With your proposed tweak, it's almost certain that there wouldn't be a logical "who got it right / who got it wrong" pattern that wouldn't suit the GMAT's aims. The fact that statement 2 would be insufficient is just too "gotcha" and that's not the GMAT's style.

Which is, again, why that "Why Are You Here?" mentality is so useful - in order to make a fair, GMAT-style question, the authors will employ statements like statement 1 that at first glance look like throwaways, but that serve to set the parameters for the other statement. Paying attention to that possibility should help you immensely on some of these questions.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.