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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

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.

Princeton review

Expert replies
by CSASHISHPANDAY » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:43 pm
This company has reduced its payroll several times during the last two years. Before each round of reductions, the human resources department has complained that the company would have to lay off productive employees. But only unproductive employees have been lost. Therefore, further reductions to the payroll will not result in the loss of any productive employees.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the CEO''s conclusion?


a)The human resources department seldom exaggerates the potential consequences of reducing the payroll.

b) The salary demands of unproductive employees have not significantly increased in the last year.

c) Fewer than half of the company''s unproductive workers were laid off as a result of the last round of reductions.

d) Few members of the company''s board of directors support keeping unproductive employees on the payroll.

e) The company has always paid productive employees and unproductive employees similarly.


OA after discussion only
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by ice_rush » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:49 pm
I'd go with (C). What's the OA?
Join the discussion

by CSASHISHPANDAY » Fri Aug 10, 2012 11:54 pm
yes it is C show ur explanation
Join the discussion

by ice_rush » Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:02 am
Since fewer than half of the unproductive workers were laid off in the last round, we have plenty of workers to be laid off in the next round and thus the company won't need to get rid off its productive workers.

hope this helps!
Join the discussion

by techyrajeev » Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:51 am
To support the CEO's conclusion, company should still have some unproductive employees otherwise how will company layoff unproductive employees?

That's why Option C is correct. because company still have more than one half unproductive employees.
Join the discussion