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
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.

Explaination of an answer

Expert replies
by Heuters » Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:35 pm
Here's the DS problem:

What is the value of (2^x + 2^x)/2^y?
(1) x-y=8
(2) x/y=-3

The correct answer is (A) Statement 1 alone...

When I tried to solve this problem, I didn't simplify the equation, I took statement (1) & (2) and solved for one variable... then solved for the other so I could technically have two integers to plug into the original equation. Therefore I chose (C) Both statements together....

The book says that you should simplify the original equation to 2^x-y+1... therefore you only need to find the answer for x-y to solve. Statement (1) answers this so that is how they solved it.

Why is the approach I took wrong? Should I have simplified the original equation first?

Thanks!
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by palvarez » Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:42 pm
Just one is sufficient entails that both are sufficient. (one can derive p or q from p being true)


But look at the wording of what A, B, C, D and E are.


C says that both are sufficient and that either alone is not sufficient.


Yes, you should simplify enough to answer "each alone being sufficient".

There is a grid approach, AD/BCE or BD/ACE.
Join the discussion

by bigmikefr » Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:56 am
The way I approach this is (2^x + 2^x)/2^y I try to work out the stimulus to make my life easier when I get to the statements.

(2^x + 2^x)/2^y yields (2^x)*(2)/(2^y)= (2^x-y)*2. This is why x-y is all you need to solve this problem.

(1) It gives you exactly what we worked out above, so A or D

(2) it tells you that x/y= -3 or that x= -3y. If you plug that into the original equation, you will get (2^-3y-y)*(2) or that (2^-4y)*2 and you cannot simplify further

So the answer is (A). Hopefully this helps
Join the discussion

by mp2437 » Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:46 pm
(1) tells you that x - y = 8,

value of (2^x + 2^x) / 2^y = 2^(x+1) / 2 ^ y = 2 ^ (x + 1 - y)...Rearranging, you get 2 ^ (1 + x -y) = 2 ^ (1 + 8) = 2^9. Sufficient.

Statement 2 gives a ratio, which others have mentioned above is insufficient to solve.
Join the discussion