Three business partners owned 100% of a certain company

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:06 am
Thanked: 6 times
Three business partners owned 100% of a certain company. When they sold the company, one partner received exactly 5/8 of the proceeds of the sale and the other partners shared the remainder of the proceeds. How much money did the partner who received the smallest amount of the proceeds receive from the sale?


(1) The partner who received the smallest amount from the sale received exactly 1/5 the amount received by the partner who received the second largest amount.


(2) The partner who received the second largest amount from the sale received half of the two million dollars received by the partner who received the largest amount.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:58 pm
gmatnmein2010 wrote:Three business partners owned 100% of a certain company. When they sold the company, one partner received exactly 5/8 of the proceeds of the sale and the other partners shared the remainder of the proceeds. How much money did the partner who received the smallest amount of the proceeds receive from the sale?


(1) The partner who received the smallest amount from the sale received exactly 1/5 the amount received by the partner who received the second largest amount.


(2) The partner who received the second largest amount from the sale received half of the two million dollars received by the partner who received the largest amount.
IMO B.

A. Total not known, not sufficient
B.
5/8x=2mm highest share partner (mm=million)
x=16/5mm total
remaining share=3/8x=6/5mm
second largest share, given, 1mm
smallest share=6/5mm-1mm=1/5mm
Sufficient

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 1537
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:10 pm
Thanked: 653 times
Followed by:252 members

by papgust » Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:01 pm
From the question, you know that the largest (L) received 5/8 of proceeds of sale and Second-largest(SL) and smallest (S) received 3/8 of proceeds of sale.

You are asked to find the amount that smallest (S) received.

A. From looking at this statement, we get no amount as such. We are still playing with fractions. Without an amount, we cannot calculate the money received by smallest.

Insufficient.

B. 2 * 10^6 = L = 5/8 * X (Let X be the total amount)

X = 3.2 * 10^6 OR 3.2 million

L already received 5/8 (3.2 million) OR 2 million.

SL = 1/2 * L = 1/2 * 2 = 1 million.

So, S = X - L - SL

S = 3.2 million - 2 million - 1 million = 0.2 million.

Sufficient.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1022
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 11:49 pm
Location: Gandhinagar
Thanked: 41 times
Followed by:2 members

by shashank.ism » Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:40 am
gmatnmein2010 wrote:Three business partners owned 100% of a certain company. When they sold the company, one partner received exactly 5/8 of the proceeds of the sale and the other partners shared the remainder of the proceeds. How much money did the partner who received the smallest amount of the proceeds receive from the sale?


(1) The partner who received the smallest amount from the sale received exactly 1/5 the amount received by the partner who received the second largest amount.


(2) The partner who received the second largest amount from the sale received half of the two million dollars received by the partner who received the largest amount.
Let the partner's share be X,Y,Z
X= 5/8 T
Y+Z= 3/8 T

St.1) z=1/5 Y we don't know total amt. ===insuff..
St.2) X= 2 so T = 8/5 x 2 =3.2 million
we don't know relation bet Y and Z

combined: Y+Z = 3/8 x 3.2 =1.2 also z=1/5 Y ==> 6/5 Y = 1.2 --> Y = 1 so z= 0.2 suff...Ans C
My Websites:
www.mba.webmaggu.com - India's social Network for MBA Aspirants

www.deal.webmaggu.com -India's online discount, coupon, free stuff informer.

www.dictionary.webmaggu.com - A compact free online dictionary with images.

Nothing is Impossible, even Impossible says I'm possible.

User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:06 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by tnaim » Sun Nov 28, 2010 8:30 pm
I don't really like the way the second statement is worded. The second statement reads "received half OF the two million dollars RECEIVED BY the partner who received the largest amount". This made it sound to me as though the partner who has received the largest sum has given 1/2 of what he received to the 2nd recipient, messing the whole meaning; and being a data sufficiency question, the statement made me think that to think that the 2nd recipient received 1 million not from the largest recipient would be a trap.
uhggggggggg[/u]