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
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget 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.

Seminar problem TEST I 18 (1000CR)

Expert replies
by Warlock007 » Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:25 pm
dear all
please help me with the answer and explaination

Critics of sales seminars run by outside consultants point out that since 1987, revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees attended consultant-led seminars were lower than revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees did not attend such seminars. The critics charge that for vacuum cleaner companies, the sales seminars are ill conceived and a waste of money.
Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to the critics of sales seminars?
(A) Those vacuum cleaner companies whose sales were highest prior to 1987 are the only companies that did not send employees to the seminars.
(B) Vacuum cleaner companies that have sent employees to sales seminars since 1987 experienced a greater drop in sales than they had prior to 1987.
(C) The cost of vacuum cleaner sales seminars run by outside consultants has risen dramatically since 1987.
(D) The poor design of vacuum cleaner sales seminars is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
(E) Since 1987, sales of vacuum cleaners have risen twenty percent.

OA A
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by maihuna » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:39 pm
A is obvious.

Its like saying married couple are happy and then counter example is only happy people marry, so since companies whose sales are already highest, its likely fall in revenue is to do less with employee attending seminar.s
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion

by tendee » Wed Jan 26, 2011 8:40 am
Critics claim the sale seminar is useless because the companies who sent their employees to the seminar experienced a decline in their revenue. (Flaw in reasoning)
Anser is A because it says that the companies who did not send their employees to the seminar also experienced a decline in their sale,so, it challenge the critic's claim.
B) agrees with the critics
(C) does not talk about the cause and effect relationship - irrelevant
(D) out of scope
(E) out of scope
Join the discussion

by mundasingh123 » Sat Feb 05, 2011 1:52 am
I disagree with the manner in which A has been interpreted by both the Members above.
The stimulus says that companies that sent their employess to seminars had lower revenues than Companies that did not.
Nowhere is it mentioned that Companies that sent their employees faced decline in revenues .
Even Married people Example does not suit well in this case.A seems to be saying something totally Different
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Join the discussion