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.

Wood

Expert replies
by imskpwr » Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:55 am
Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant time and money to dismantle older houses piece by piece in order to reuse the wood. Although the company does earn a net profit despite these expenditures, the company could earn even more by adopting a new policy. Brothers' new land contains hundreds of trees that are already slated to be razed; the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Brothers' policy to reuse wood?

It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood.

There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.

Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.

It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.

The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Ankur87 » Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:17 am
IMO : D
Join the discussion

by ice_rush » Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:45 am
choice C gives us a good reason to continue reusing the wood rather than cut down new trees.
Join the discussion

by das.ashmita » Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:56 pm
Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant time and money to dismantle older houses piece by piece in order to reuse the wood. Although the company does earn a net profit despite these expenditures, the company could earn even more by adopting a new policy. Brothers' new land contains hundreds of trees that are already slated to be razed; the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Brothers' policy to reuse wood?
It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood. - out of scope

There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees. - out of scope

Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees. - supports why re-usage is better option

It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood. - weakens

The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily. - although its availability is increasing, how is it more beneficial than newly-chopped trees is not mentioned.

IMO C
let me know if I am wrong :)
Join the discussion