Puys,

I am an IT professional with 5 years work ex. I have 760 on GMAT and am targeting fall 2012 programs. I am researching marketing career. Based on the info on the web, marketing seems to offer exciting opportunities to people who knows how to persuade people / manage public perceptions / communicate essence of a brand or benefits of products.

I consider myself good in the above areas based on the following success stories. These activities were outside of my core work and i had engaged purely out of enthusiasm. The big question is "Do these successes make me a good fit for marketing jobs ?". In other words, "Are the tasks involved in these stories representative of tasks in marketing at least to some extent" ?

1- Head of Marketing campaign for a week long technology festival in 2010 @ my workplace. The festival engaged about 1000 people. The Campaign included posters, banners, email communications, roadshows, email based teaser events , outdoor teaser events and newsletters. The Success of the fest was well attributed to the successful marketing campaign. I had headed a similar campaign in 2009.

2 - Founder of a points based system to continuously (not just during appraisal times) remind employees of their appraisal goals and encourage even baby steps taken towards their goals. The system did not practically workout but the idea was very well received by the management.

3 - Head Election campaigner @ students union election. Had single handedly planned the election campaign, sold the campaign ideas to my gang fellas, executed the plan flawlessly and successfully got our candidate win (against a very powerful candidate) in a long drawn, fiercely fought election.

4- Besides, i had engaged in organizing college festivals & technical extravaganzas and had excelled.

vikas.mogle Says

I agree, 80% accuracy means you are on right track. you can focus on improving response time. When you do timed tests, check your response. But if 80% accuracy on SC means you can move to other sections, i.e. RC and CR. Improving response in SC buys you more time in RC, which takes more time.

Thanks Vikas.mogle / Vrindha81. I will focus on my speed.

hello puys..here are few Q's from 1000SC:
Though I know the answers, I don't know explanation. PLZ help.

1> Kansas Republican Nancy Kassebaum, one of only two women in the U.S. Senate in 1992, said she did not so much wish for more women senators but more moderate Republican ones.
(A) did not so much wish for more women senators but more moderate Republican ones

-Did not so much wish for more X but more Y - Unidiomatic construction
- "wish" appears to modify only X. Wish needs to before "So much" to clearly modify both X and Y.
-"republican ones' is imprecise/ambiguous/wordy.
-eliminate

(B) wished not so much for more senators who were women than moderate Republicans

-not so much for more X who were woman than Y - Unidiomatic
-'senators who were women' is unnecessarily wordy
- eliminate

(C) did not wish so much for more women senators as for more moderate Republicans
- did not wish so much for more X as for more Y - looks good.
- keep the option

(D) did not wish for more women senators so much as moderate Republicans

- did not wish for more X so much as Y. Wish doesnt modify Y.
- eliminate

(E) wished for more senators who are moderate Republicans than women

- Incorrectly considers "moderate republicans" and "women" as qualities of a same senator.
- eliminate
My choice C.

2> Just because King Alfred occupied and fortified London in 886 did not mean that he also won the loyalty of its citizens: the invading Danes were well aware of this weakness and used it to their advantage in 893.
(A) Just because King Alfred occupied and fortified London in 886 did not mean that he
-entire sentence is in past tense. The use of years 886 and 893 helps in understanding the sequence of events. Nothings sounds odd. The pronoun 'its' clearly refers to London.
-keep the option

(B) The fact that King Alfred had occupied and fortified London in 886 did not mean that he had
-The use of 'fact' in the place of "Just because" makes a slight negative impact as there is no emphasis that X did not mean Y.
-use of perfect tense for events in 886 sounds ok.
-keep the option

(C) Just because King Alfred occupied and fortified London in 886, it did not mean he
- 'it' has no clear antecedant/unnecessary.
- The connecting word "that" is missing
- The use of 'it' makes the antecedant of "its" unclear.
- Eliminate

(D) The fact that King Alfred occupied and fortified London in 886, it did not mean that he
- 'It' is unnecessary
- Use of 'fact'
-The use of 'it' makes the antecedant of "its" unclear.
- eliminate

(E) Just because King Alfred had occupied and fortified London in 886, it did not mean he
- "It" is unnecessary
- "that" is missing
- The use of 'it' makes the antecedant of "its" unclear.
- eliminate
My take A

3> It seems likely that a number of astronomical phenomena, such as the formation of planetary nebulas, may be caused by the interaction where two stars orbit each other at close range.
(A) may be caused by the interaction where two stars orbit each other
- 'where' should explain a place. here it explains 'interaction' which is NOT a place
-Eliminate

(B) may be caused by the interaction between two stars that each orbit the other
- "each orbit the other at close range" is awkward.
- eliminate

(C) are because of the interaction between two stars that orbit each other
- caused is preferrable than because here
- eliminate
(D) are caused by the interaction of two stars where each is orbiting the other
- Use of where
-'each is orbiting the other' is wordy
-eliminate

(E) are caused by the interaction of two stars orbiting each other
- looks good
My choice E.

4> In the last few years, the number of convicted criminals given community service sentences, which allow the criminals to remain unconfined while they perform specific jobs benefiting the public, have risen dramatically.
(A) sentences, which allow the criminals to remain unconfined while they perform specific jobs benefiting the public, have
- the number...have risen Subject-verb disagreement'
-eliminate

(B) sentences, performing specific jobs that benefit the public while being allowed to remain unconfined, have
- the number...have risen Subject-verb disagreement
- 'performing specific jobs' incorrectly modifies sentences
-eliminate
(C) sentences, performing specific jobs beneficial to the public while they are allowed to remain unconfined, have
- the number...have risen Subject-verb disagreement'
-eliminate
(D) sentences which allow them to remain unconfined in their performing of specific jobs beneficial to the public has

- 'in their performing of specific jobs' is clumsy and awkward
- eliminate

(E) sentences allowing them to remain unconfined while performing specific jobs that benefit the public has
- looks good
My choice E.

Folks,

Just wanted to benchmark my progress with you. I am working on OG10 solving 25 questions everyday. As i look back on day 6 (150 questions over) I see that i have consistenty hit 80% correct, taking 2.5 mins per question. First, I would like to know Whether OG10s difficulty level increases gradually as otherwise its clear that my performance has not improved. Second, How well are you guys doing? Thanks in advance.

Hi Phalanx ,
I am not sure of the right idiom -
X compensated for by y
X compensated for in y

I too am not sure. But "by" sounds (quiet strongly) correct to me.

However what about the comma phrase-
1.what skills he was lacking in visual composition
2.whatever skills he lacked in visual composition

I believe the first one is a better phrase as it suggests an ongoing situation.

I really have trouble with these tenses. Anyways, i did some research and looks like "past tense is preferred here". Past continuous tense is generally used to express that a longer action was interrupted by a shorter action.For instance "Tom was eating apple when the door bell rang". In our passage, we are trying to describe two actions "lacking skills" and "compensating" that went hand in hand. Hence past tense is preferred. Please correct me if i am wrong.

and what about the use of prepositional phrase-
In his ability or by his ability.Ability is abstract so dont u think by his ability sounds od* !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think correct choice of preposition here also depends on the rest of the sentence. All the below sentences that use different prepositions sound correct to me.

I bank on his ability to speak fluently.
I was astonished by his ability to run fast.
I believe in his ability to handle tough customers.

And have a look at the below sentence from grammar point of view.

She was compensated for the loss of her arm in the accident.

Could you please highlight the part you want me to understand? The sentence states "she was compensated for X". There is no information of How she was compensated. May be sentences like "She was compensated for loss of her arm in the accident by a fat cheque" or something like that would be close to our passage.

Hi Puys , Few questions from the previous Pages.I thought these questions worthful to discuss here-
1.Griffith's cameraman Bitzer was a mechanical wizard, and what skill was lacking in his visual composition was more than compensated by his ability to combine gadgets and props to produce the required cinematic effects.
(A) what skill was lacking in his visual composition was more than compensated by
(B) what skills he was lacking in visual composition, he more than compensated for in
(C) whatever his visual composition lacked, he more than compensated in
(D) whatever skills he lacked in visual composition, he more than compensated for by
(E) he more than compensated his lack of visual composition with

I think Answer is B/E, However My vote is likely to fall with E.

Griffith's cameraman Bitzer was a mechanical wizard, and what skill was lacking in his visual composition was more than compensated by his ability to combine gadgets and props to produce the required cinematic effects.
(A) what skill was lacking in his visual composition was more than compensated by
(B) what skills he was lacking in visual composition, he more than compensated for in
(C) whatever his visual composition lacked, he more than compensated in
(D) whatever skills he lacked in visual composition, he more than compensated for by
(E) he more than compensated his lack of visual composition with

A reading of the passage and quick look at the options suggest that the question is of "Comparision type", the keywords being "was more than compensated". The two things compared must be parallel. One of the things compared "His ability to...." is NOT in the underlined portion and hence our choice must parallel this construction.

(A) what skill was lacking in his visual composition was more than compensated by

X was more than compensated by Y. X is "skill" which parallels Y "ability". But phrasing of X doesn't sound idiomatic. "What skill was lacking" would have been much better, if it were "whatever skill was lacking".

(B) what skills he was lacking in visual composition, he more than compensated for in

X, he more than compensated for in Y. In otherwords, "He more than compensated for X in Y". The construction doesn't sound idiomatic. "He more than compensated for X by Y" sounds right. Eliminate option B.

(C) whatever his visual composition lacked, he more than compensated in

He more than compensated X in Y. Sounds unidiomatic. Further X is not Skills or anything that he owns. It is something that Visual composition lacks. Comparing it with his ability is not logical.Rather it could have been compared with something that he added to the visual using his ability. Eliminate C.

(D) whatever skills he lacked in visual composition, he more than compensated for by

He more than compensated for X by Y. Sounds good. "Skills" is compared with "his ability".

(E) he more than compensated his lack of visual composition with

He more than compensated X with Y. Not sure whether this is right. Also, X alters the meaning by comparing "lack of visual composition" rather than "lack of skills in visual composition". I feel that the difference is significant.
Eliminate E.

A and D are the finalists. I will take 'D'.

My answer would be 'A'.
My justification regarding these 2 factors :
1. byzantines are 'struggling' for 'obtaining power'; I mean, (if my history serves correct) byzantines (eastern roman empire) are struggling to 'obtain' power against kremlin (russia). Inconsistency here is, kremlin is not byzantine country to 'struggle' for power -- hope I put it correctly to make sense
2. now, if we put within like - country A is struggling .... power 'within' the country B; evidently (for me atleast) 'inside' is a better option.

Please correct me if i'm wrong (with an OA).

Vikas13068,

Could you please post the OA and the explanation?

１．That the new managing editor rose from the publications soft news sections to a leadership position is more of a landmark in the industry than her being a woman.
A. her being a woman
B. being a woman is
C. her womanhood
D. that she was a woman
E. that she is a woman
２．In a leveraged buyout, investors borrow huge sums of money to buy companies, hoping to pay off the debt by using the company's earnings and to profit richly by the later resale of the companies or their divisions.
A. by using the company's earnings and to profit
B. by using the companies' earnings and by profiting
C. using the companies' earnings and profiting
D. with the company's earnings, profiting
E. with the companies' earnings and to profit
３．Legislation in the Canadian province of Ontario requires of both public and private employers that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are usually held by men.
(A) that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are
(B) that pay for jobs historically held by women should be the same as for a job requiring comparable skills
(C) to pay the same in jobs historically held by women as in jobs of comparable skill that are
(D) to pay the same regardless of whether a job was historically held by women or is one demanding comparable skills
(E) to pay as much for jobs historically held by women as for a job demanding comparable skills


can some one reply for these questions...

１．That the new managing editor rose from the publications soft news sections to a leadership position is more of a landmark in the industry than her being a woman.

Rephrased: X is more of a landmark than Y.

X and Y have to be parallel in structure and logic. In structure, X is a complete independent sentence 'The New Managing director rose from P to Q'. Hence Y also need to be an independant sentence. The sentences must be comparable subject to subject and verb to verb.In logic, X refers to the whole idea/fact of the MD climbing higher position. Hence Y should refer to the idea/fact that she is a woman.

A. her being a woman
Not parallel in structure.
B. being a woman is
Not parallel in structure.
C. her womanhood
Not parallel in structure.
D. that she was a woman
Matches in structure. But past-tense 'was' is incorrectly used to express an
ever-true fact. ( I did consider this option seriously while solving)
E. that she is a woman
Matches perfectly.

２．In a leveraged buyout, investors borrow huge sums of money to buy companies, hoping to pay off the debt by using the company's earnings and to profit richly by the later resale of the companies or their divisions.

Rephrased: hoping to pay off the (Z)... and to profit

The two things that are hoped (pay and profit) must be parallel. They are. So 'to profit' in the underlined portion must be correct. Scan the options and eliminate B,C and D. Scan the other two options A and E concentrating on the differences between them. The "Company's Vs Companies' " difference is clear. Get back to the passage to check which one of them is right. Quiet obviously 'E' is the right choice.

A. by using the company's earnings and to profit
B. by using the companies' earnings and by profiting
C. using the companies' earnings and profiting
D. with the company's earnings, profiting
E. with the companies' earnings and to profit
３．Legislation in the Canadian province of Ontario requires of both public and private employers that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are usually held by men.

rephrased: P requires of both A and B that ....

In the above rephrased sentence, since 'of A and B' is used, the sentence must be followed by 'that'. 'to' cannot be used. 'To' will fit only if the sentence loses 'of' and becomes "P requires A and B to". Scan options and eliminate C, D and E.

Check remaining options A and B. B incorectly 'compares 'jobs' (women) to 'a job' (men). Also the use of 'should' in B is questionable as the sentence is in subjuctive mood and the sense of 'must' is already conveyed by the word 'requires'.

(A) that pay be the same for jobs historically held by women as for jobs requiring comparable skill that are
(B) that pay for jobs historically held by women should be the same as for a job requiring comparable skills
(C) to pay the same in jobs historically held by women as in jobs of comparable skill that are
(D) to pay the same regardless of whether a job was historically held by women or is one demanding comparable skills
(E) to pay as much for jobs historically held by women as for a job demanding comparable skills

Hi
Option C - my take.
My confusion was the use of the word INSIDE/WITHIN.
Here the word "INSIDE/WITHIN" is related to "struggle for power ".So in this case "WITHIN" should go with the "struggle for power ".

Hope it sounds logical enough !

Joy

Sure dude. Option C sounds logical. Per se, i would not have found any error with option 'C'. But option 'E' looks more logical to me. Can you help me to eliminate option 'E'?

To make things simple for our analysis, I rephrased the passage substituting simpler phrases for complex ones.

X will start a struggle inside the kremlin
X will start a struggle within the kremlin

I felt that the word 'within' is used to emphasize a limitation. For example, "Struggle continued within the country" emphasizing that the struggle did not spill outside. On the other hand, inside doesn't emphasize the limitation. "Struggle started inside the country".

For our question, i felt that the author doesn't intend to emphasize that the struggle is limited to kremlin. Hence i chose 'E'.

The eventual departure of Brezhnev undoubtedly will touch off a Byzantine struggle for obtaining power inside the Kremlin.
A) undoubtedly will touch off a Byzantine struggle for obtaining power inside the Kremlin.
B) has undoubtedly touched off a Byzantine struggle for power inside the Kremlin.
C) undoubtedly will touch off a Byzantine struggle for power within the Kremlin.
D) undoubtedly will have touched off a Byzantine struggle for power inside the Kremlin.
E) undoubtedly will touch off a Byzantine struggle for power inside the Kremlin.

Hi Guys , I think the choice is either A,C Or E.My confusion is because of-
1.Which is right-for Power/For obtaining Power
2.Inside/Within(Whats the diff?)

My take is E.

In option A, the word 'obtaining' is redundant. Hence option A is out.

In option B, the verb 'has touched off' implies that the departure of Brezhnev has already happened. Describing that past departure as eventual sounds awkward in the context (atleast for me), so B is out.

Option C uses 'within the Kremlin' which seems to suggest that the struggle is confined to Kremlin. 'inside the kremlin' seems a better choice.
So 'C' is out.

'Will have touched off' is awkward in 'D'.

Hence 'E' is the best choice.