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.

TestPrep

Expert replies
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

Re: TestPrep

by camitava » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:48 am
moneyman wrote:Is m+z>0 ??

(1) m-3z>0
(2)4z-m>0

Fromt this I deduced that 3z<m<4z> 0 or z > 0
If z > 0, m > 3z i.e. m > 0
So m + z > 0

So go for C. Got me, Maxx?
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Join the discussion

by codesnooker » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:06 am
Though I have not started working on inequalities, so it is hard for me to understand the above solution posted by Camitava.

However, there is also another way to solve this problem without having much knowledge about inequalities. Here it goes:-

Statement 1: m - 3z > 0 => m > 3z
Statement 2: 4Z - m > 0 => 4z > m

From both statement as you deduce that 4z > m > 3z

Now lets check the solution with negative values to prove that m + z < 0

Lets take z = -1 (simplest one)
i.e -4 > m > -3
which is incorrect as -4 can't greater than -3.

Now lets check with some negative fractional value.
Lets take -1/12 (divisible by both 3 and 4)

therefore equation becomes, -0.33 > m > -0.25, which again incorrect, as -0.33 cannot be greater than -0.25

So, it means z cannot be negative. So, if z is not negative, then m also cannot be negative.

Therefore adding 2 positive number yields a positive number.
i.e. m + z > 0

There C is the answer
Last edited by codesnooker on Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:27 am, edited 3 times in total.
Join the discussion

Re: TestPrep

by codesnooker » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:09 am
camitava wrote:
From this I deduced that 3z<m<4z> 0 or z > 0
Hi Camitava, Can you explain here how you have taken z > 0 ?

I didn't understand this point.
Join the discussion

Re: TestPrep

by camitava » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:49 am
codesnooker wrote:
camitava wrote:
From this I deduced that 3z<m<4z> 0 or z > 0
Hi Camitava, Can you explain here how you have taken z > 0 ?

I didn't understand this point.

Sorry! I really don;t know how did I mess up while posting my last post.

I meant to say that - add the two equs : m-3z>0
and 4z-m>0.
So m - 3z + 4z - m > 0
or z > 0
From this m > 3z or m > 0
So m + z > 0

Got me, Codesnooker?
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Join the discussion

by camitava » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:51 am
Ohhh! Got it now... Last time I forgot to uncheck the option - Disable HTML in this post or may be I messed up in some other way ...
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Join the discussion

by codesnooker » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:52 am
Sure, thanks
Join the discussion

by codesnooker » Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:29 am
Yes HTML code is ruining the answers in case of questions of inequalities. Disable them, before posting answers or questions of inequalities
Join the discussion

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:02 am
Just as a general tip, you can turn html off under your profile and then just unclick the box if you ever decide you need it.

As a quick point on this discussion (if it's even needed anymore), Codesnooker got to:
From both statement as you deduce that 4z > m > 3z
From here, we can see that:

4z > 3z

which can only be true if z is positive.

And, since m > 3z, this means that m is also positive.

So, since both z and m are positive, it must be true that:

m + z

is also positive.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Join the discussion

by cjiang16 » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:41 pm
C is the answer.
Join the discussion