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.

Tough one

Expert replies
by ranjithreddy.k9 » Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:39 pm
Q. On a company sponsored tour, 65% of the passengers were company employees and remaining passengers were their guests. 70% of employees, who were married, can invite their spouse to the tour. what will be the ratio of married to unmarried employees?

I.There was a total of 400 couples on the tour.

II.There was a total of 120 bachelors who were present.


a. Statement (I) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (II) alone is not sufficient.
b. Statement (II) ALONE is sufficient, but statement (I) alone is not sufficient.
c. BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.
d. Each statement alone is sufficient.
e. Statement (I) and (II) TOGETHER are NOT sufficient to answer the question asked, and additional data are needed.
[spoiler]

OA : B[/spoiler]
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by bubbliiiiiiii » Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:15 am
If I were to choose an answer I would have chosen E.

What is the source?
Regards,

Pranay
Join the discussion

by Roy@MasterGmat » Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:17 am
There seems to be a problem with the question as posted. Assuming the second sentence indeed means 70% of the employees are married, we could derive that 30% of them are unmarried, thus allowing us to calculate the ratio of married to unmarried employees without the statements (70%:30% --> 7:3).

Perhaps the question asks for the ratio of married to unmarried passengers?
Join the discussion

by tpr-becky » Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:05 am
I think the problem lies in the commas off setting the "who were married" if you take the commas out you find that not every employee is married. Thus you get

.65(P) = E and therefore .35(p)=G

.70(ME) = S (70% of married employees brought a spouse)

we want to know ME/(E-ME).

1) the total number of couples does not help us to find out how many were married and thus is insufficient.
2) if there were 120 bachelors (and assuming that bachelor is the only way to be unmarried) then you can figure out the number of employees - 120 = .30(E) to get 400 employees, then subtract the number of bachelors to supposedly get 280 married employees and 120 unmarried. Thus B would be correct.

I think the real problem is using the word bachelors to mean unmarried employees (there could be women as well).
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
Join the discussion