Download DI Special Charts Questions for CAT<\/a><\/p>\n Enroll for CAT 2022 Crash Course<\/a><\/p>\n Instructions<\/b><\/p>\n Five vendors are being considered for a service. The evaluation committee evaluated each vendor on six aspects – Cost, Customer Service,Features, Quality, Reach, and Reliability. Each of these evaluations are on a scale of 0 (worst) to 100 (perfect). The evaluation scores on these aspects are shown in the radar chart. For example, Vendor 1 obtains a score of 52 on Reliability, Vendor 2 obtains a score of 45 on Features and Vendor 3 obtains a score of 90 on Cost.<\/p>\n Question 1:\u00a0<\/b>List of all the vendors who are among the top three vendors on all six aspects is:<\/p>\n a)\u00a0Vendor 1 and Vendor 3<\/p>\n b)\u00a0None of the Vendors<\/p>\n c)\u00a0Vendor 3<\/p>\n d)\u00a0Vendor 1<\/p>\n 1)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(C)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The data can be tabulated as follows(approximately):<\/p>\n Top 3 on Reliability: Vendor 3, Vendor 5, Vendor 1<\/p>\n Top 3 on Reach:\u00a0Vendor 1, Vendor 5, Vendor 3<\/p>\n Top 3 on Quality:\u00a0Vendor 1, Vendor 2, Vendor 3<\/p>\n Top 3 on Features:\u00a0Vendor 4, Vendor 5, Vendor 3<\/p>\n Top 3 on Customer Services:\u00a0Vendor 4, Vendor 1, Vendor 3<\/p>\n Top 3 on Cost:\u00a0Vendor 3,\u00a0 Vendor 2, Vendor 1<\/p>\n Only Vendor 3 ranks among top 3 in all the six parameters.<\/p>\n Question 2:\u00a0<\/b>List of all the vendors who are among the top two scorers on the maximum number of aspects is:<\/p>\n a)\u00a0Vendor 2, Vendor 3 and Vendor 4<\/p>\n b)\u00a0Vendor 1 and Vendor 5<\/p>\n c)\u00a0Vendor 2 and Vendor 5<\/p>\n d)\u00a0Vendor 1 and Vendor 2<\/p>\n 2)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(B)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The data can be tabulated as follows(approximately):<\/p>\n Top 3 on Reliability: Vendor 3, Vendor 5<\/p>\n Top 3 on Reach: Vendor 1, Vendor 5<\/p>\n Top 3 on Quality: Vendor 1, Vendor 2<\/p>\n Top 3 on Features: Vendor 4, Vendor 5<\/p>\n Top 3 on Customer Services: Vendor 4, Vendor 1<\/p>\n Top 3 on Cost: Vendor 3, Vendor 2<\/p>\n Vendor 1: 3 times\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Vendor 2:\u00a0Only once\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Vendor 3:\u00a02 times\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Vendor 4:\u00a0 2 times\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Vendor 5: 3 times<\/p>\n Here 1 and 5 comes 3 times. Hence B is the answer.<\/p>\n Question 3:\u00a0<\/b>A vendor’s final score is the average of their scores on all six aspects. Which vendor has the highest final score?<\/p>\n a)\u00a0Vendor 4<\/p>\n b)\u00a0Vendor 2<\/p>\n c)\u00a0Vendor 1<\/p>\n d)\u00a0Vendor 3<\/p>\n 3)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(D)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The data can be tabulated as follows(approximately):<\/p>\n The average of the vendor will be highest which has highest total score. Hence vendor 3 has the highest average.<\/p>\n Question 4:\u00a0<\/b>On which aspect is the median score of the five vendors the least?<\/p>\n a)\u00a0Customer Service<\/p>\n b)\u00a0Cost<\/p>\n c)\u00a0Reliability<\/p>\n d)\u00a0Quality<\/p>\n 4)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(A)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The data can be tabulated as follows(approximately):<\/p>\n Customer Services: 28,41,50,55,70\u00a0(The median is 50)<\/p>\n Cost: 50,71,77,81,90\u00a0(The median is 77)<\/p>\n Reliability: 26, 40, 52, 60, 75 (The median is 52)<\/p>\n Quality: 40, 48, 62, 69, 72\u00a0(The median is 62)<\/p>\n Features: 40, 45, 56, 75, 90 (The median is 56)<\/p>\n Reach: 46, 58, 63, 70, 80 (The median is 63)<\/p>\n Hence the customer services has the lowest median.<\/p>\n Instructions<\/b><\/p>\n A large store has only three departments, Clothing, Produce, and Electronics. The following figure shows the percentages of revenue and cost from the three departments for the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. The dotted lines depict percentage levels. So for example, in 2016, 50% of store’s revenue came from its Electronics department while 40% of its costs were incurred in the Produce department.<\/p>\n In this setup, Profit is computed as (Revenue – Cost) and Percentage Profit as Profit\/Cost \u00d7 100%. Question 5:\u00a0<\/b>What was the approximate difference in profit percentages of the store in 2017 and 2018?<\/p>\n a)\u00a015.5<\/p>\n b)\u00a025.0<\/p>\n c)\u00a08.3<\/p>\n d)\u00a033.3<\/p>\n 5)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(C)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n We can make the following table from the web chart given in the question:<\/p>\n If we consider the total cost in the year<\/p>\n 2016 as 100, then according to Statement 1, the total revenue in 2016 must be 200.<\/p>\n The store\u2019s revenue doubled from 2016 to 2017, thus the total revenue in the year 2017 = 400.<\/p>\n We can find the revenue for the individual department in the year 2017, from the table.<\/p>\n There was no profit from the Electronics department in 2017, thus, we can find the total cost in 2017= 300<\/p>\n Considering the statement 4, we can find the total revenue in 2018 and tabulate the following table.<\/p>\n Profit percentage in 2017= (400-300)\/300 %= 33.33%<\/p>\n Profit percentage in 2018= (250-200)\/200 %= 25%<\/p>\n The approximate difference in profit percentages of the store in 2017 and 2018= (33.33-25)%= 8.33%<\/p>\n Option C.<\/p>\n Checkout: CAT Free Practice Questions and Videos<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Question 6:\u00a0<\/b>What percentage of the total profits for the store in 2016 was from the Electronics department?<\/p>\n 6)\u00a0Answer:\u00a070<\/b><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n We can make the following table from the web chart given in the question:<\/p>\n If we consider the total cost in the year<\/p>\n 2016 as 100, then according to Statement 1, the total revenue in 2016 must be 200.<\/p>\n The store\u2019s revenue doubled from 2016 to 2017, thus the total revenue in the year 2017 = 400.<\/p>\n We can find the revenue for the individual department in the year 2017, from the table.<\/p>\n There was no profit from the Electronics department in 2017, thus, we can find the total cost in 2017= 300<\/p>\n Considering the statement 4, we can find the total revenue in 2018 and tabulate the following table.<\/p>\n Profit in 2016 = 200-100= 100 Question 7:\u00a0<\/b>What was the ratio of revenue generated from the Produce department in 2017 to that in 2018?<\/p>\n a)\u00a016 : 9<\/p>\n b)\u00a04 : 3<\/p>\n c)\u00a09 : 16<\/p>\n d)\u00a08 : 5<\/p>\n 7)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(D)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n We can make the following table from the web chart given in the question:<\/p>\n If we consider the total cost in the year<\/p>\n 2016 as 100, then according to Statement 1, the total revenue in 2016 must be 200.<\/p>\n The store\u2019s revenue doubled from 2016 to 2017, thus the total revenue in the year 2017 = 400.<\/p>\n We can find the revenue for the individual department in the year 2017, from the table.<\/p>\n There was no profit from the Electronics department in 2017, thus, we can find the total cost in 2017= 300<\/p>\n Considering the statement 4, we can find the total revenue in 2018 and tabulate the following table.<\/p>\n The\u00a0ratio of revenue generated from the Produce department in 2017 to that in 2018 = 160:100= 8:5<\/p>\n Question 8:\u00a0<\/b>What was the percentage profit of the store in 2018?<\/p>\n 8)\u00a0Answer:\u00a025<\/b><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n We can make the following table from the web chart given in the question:<\/p>\n If we consider the total cost in the year<\/p>\n 2016 as 100, then according to Statement 1, the total revenue in 2016 must be 200.<\/p>\n The store\u2019s revenue doubled from 2016 to 2017, thus the total revenue in the year 2017 = 400.<\/p>\n We can find the revenue for the individual department in the year 2017, from the table.<\/p>\n There was no profit from the Electronics department in 2017, thus, we can find the total cost in 2017= 300<\/p>\n Considering the statement 4, we can find the total revenue in 2018 and tabulate the following table.<\/p>\n The percentage profit of the store in 2018= (250-200)\/200= 25%<\/p>\n Instructions<\/b><\/p>\n To compare the rainfall data, India Meteorological Department (IMD) calculated the Long Period Average (LPA) of rainfall during period June-August for each of the 16 states. The figure given below shows the actual rainfall (measured in mm) during June-August, 2019 and the percentage deviations from LPA of respective states in 2018. Each state along with its actual rainfall is presented in the figure.<\/p>\n Question 9:\u00a0<\/b>The LPA of a state for a year is defined as the average rainfall in the preceding 10 years considering the period of June-August. For example, LPA in 2018 is the average rainfall during 2009-2018 and LPA in 2019 is the average rainfall during 2010-2019. It is also observed that the actual rainfall in Gujarat in 2019 is 20% more than the rainfall in 2009. The LPA of Gujarat in 2019 is closest to<\/p>\n a)\u00a0475 mm<\/p>\n b)\u00a0505 mm<\/p>\n c)\u00a0490 mm<\/p>\n d)\u00a0525 mm<\/p>\n 9)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(C)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The actual rainfall in Gujarat in 2019 is 20% more than the rainfall in 2009.<\/p>\n So If the actual rainfall in 2009 = x mm<\/p>\n Then the actual rainfall in 2019= 1.2x mm<\/p>\n Actual rainfall in 2019= 600mm<\/p>\n Then, actual rainfall\u00a0in 2009 = 500mm Answer C<\/p>\n Question 10:\u00a0<\/b>What is the average rainfall of all states that have actual rainfall of 600 mm or less in 2019 and have a negative deviation from LPA?<\/p>\n a)\u00a0367 mm<\/p>\n b)\u00a0500 mm<\/p>\n c)\u00a0450 mm<\/p>\n d)\u00a0460 mm<\/p>\n 10)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(D)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The states Assam, WB, Jharkhand, Delhi and Manipur satisfy the conditions given in the question.<\/p>\n The actual rainfall of all these states in 2019 are 600,600,400,300,400<\/p>\n Average of these states= 2300\/5=460mm<\/p>\n Question 11:\u00a0<\/b>If a \u2018Low Monsoon State\u2019 is defined as a state with actual rainfall from June-August, 2019 of 750 mm or less, then what is the median \u2018deviation from LPA\u2019 (as defined in the Y-axis of the figure) of \u2018Low Monsoon States\u2019?<\/p>\n a)\u00a0-10%<\/p>\n b)\u00a010%<\/p>\n c)\u00a0-20%<\/p>\n d)\u00a0-30%<\/p>\n 11)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(A)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n All the states which satisfy the condition for ‘ Low monsoon state’ are Gujrat (+25%), Karnataka (+20%), Rajasthan (+15), MP (+10%),\u00a0Assam (-10%), WB (-30%), Jharkhand (-35%), Delhi (-40%) and Manipur (-60%).<\/p>\n The median of all the deviation is -10% Assam.<\/p>\n Question 12:\u00a0<\/b>If a \u2018Heavy Monsoon State\u2019 is defined as a state with actual rainfall from June-August, 2019 of 900 mm or more, then approximately what percentage of \u2018Heavy Monsoon States\u2019 have a negative deviation from respective LPAs in 2019?<\/p>\n a)\u00a042.86<\/p>\n b)\u00a075.00<\/p>\n c)\u00a057.14<\/p>\n d)\u00a014.29<\/p>\n 12)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(A)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n The states which satisfy the condition given in the\u00a0question:<\/p>\n Maharashtra, Mizoram, Sikkim, Goa, Arunachal, Kerla, Meghalaya…..7 states<\/p>\n The \u2018Heavy Monsoon States\u2019 have a negative deviation:\u00a0Arunachal, Kerla, Meghalaya<\/p>\n = 3\/7×100=42.86%<\/p>\n Option A<\/p>\n Instructions<\/b><\/p>\n Each of the 23 boxes in the picture below represents a product manufactured by one of the following three companies: Alfa, Bravo and Charlie. The area of a box is proportional to the revenue from the corresponding product, while its centre represents the Product popularity and Market potential scores of the product (out of 20). The shadings of some of the boxes have got erased.<\/p>\n The companies classified their products into four categories based on a combination of scores (out of 20) on the two parameters – Product popularity and Market potential as given below:<\/p>\n Question 13:\u00a0<\/b>If the smallest box on the grid is equivalent to revenue of Rs.1 crore, then what approximately was the total revenue of Bravo in Rs. crore?<\/p>\n a)\u00a040<\/p>\n b)\u00a024<\/p>\n c)\u00a034<\/p>\n d)\u00a030<\/p>\n 13)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(C)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n Let us divide the given figure in four quadrants (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).<\/p>\n Let us solve this problem by considering only one category at a time.<\/p>\n (A) Blockbuster category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 1. Alfa and Bravo had the same number of products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 7 products in Blockbuster\u00a0category.\u00a0Alfa already has two products in blockbuster category. If\u00a0Alfa\u00a0has 3 products in\u00a0blockbuster\u00a0category then Bravo will also have 3 products in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category which is not possible as there are 2 products of Charlie. Hence, we can say that Alfa and Bravo have 2 products each in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category whereas Charlie has 3 products in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 2. It is also given that Charlie had a higher revenue than Bravo from products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n We know that one of the product 1 and 2 is from Charlie and the other is from Bravo.<\/p>\n If product 1 is from Charlie, then we can say that products 1, 7 and 5 are from Charlie. Therefore, revenue generated by products in Charlie category = 2 + 4 + 6 = 12 units. (Assuming area of a square to be 1 unit)<\/p>\n In this case product 2 and product n are from Bravo.Therefore, revenue generated by products in Bravo category = 6 + 9 = 15 units.<\/p>\n We can see that products from\u00a0Charlie have a higher revenue than Bravo. Hence, this case in not possible.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Product 1 is from Bravo and Product 2 is from Charlie. We have determined each product’s company name in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n (B)\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category.<\/p>\n (1)\u00a0Charlie had more products than Bravo but fewer products than Alfa in the No-hope category.\u00a0Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.There are a total of 6 products in no-hope category.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Alfa, Charlie and Bravo have 3, 2 and 1 products in\u00a0No-hope category in that order.<\/p>\n Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.<\/p>\n Revenue generated for\u00a0Bravo\u00a0in the No-hope category = 4 units. We need same revenue for\u00a0Charlie\u00a0which ha s 2 products in this category. Hence, we can say that Product 10 and one of product 8 and 9 is from Charlie and other is from Alfa. Let’s assume that product 8 is from Charlie and product 9 is from Alfa.<\/p>\n (C) Doubtful category:<\/strong>\u00a0We have two information regarding\u00a0Doubtful category.<\/p>\n (1). Charlie did not have any product in the Doubtful category, while Alfa had one product more than Bravo in this category .<\/p>\n (2). Bravo had a higher revenue than Alfa from products in the Doubtful category.<\/p>\n We can see that there are a total of 7 products in this category. Hence, we can say that 4 products are from Alfa and 3 products are from Bravo.<\/p>\n We can see that one of product 14, 15 and 16 is from Bravo company and others are from Alfa company. Bravo will have higher revenue than Alfa only when product no. 14 is from Bravo and others (15 and 16) are from Alfa category.<\/p>\n In this case total revenue by Bravo = Product 14 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 19 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 20 = 9 + 6 + 2 = 17<\/p>\n Similarly, total revenue by Charlie = Product 15 +\u00a0Product 16\u00a0+\u00a0Product 17\u00a0+\u00a0Product 18 = 6 + 1 + 1 + 4 = 12<\/p>\n (D)\u00a0Promising\u00a0category:<\/strong>\u00a0We have only 1 direct information regarding\u00a0Promising\u00a0category.<\/p>\n 1. Each company had an equal number of products in the Promising category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 3 products in promising category with different revenue. Therefore, we can say that each company had 1 product in promising category. We are given that Alfa and Charlie had the same total revenue considering all products. We can calculate the revenue generated by Alfa and Charlie from the products in categories.<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Charlie from all categories except Promising = From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(9+6+2) + (3+1) + (0) = 21 units<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Alfa from\u00a0all categories except Promising\u00a0\u00a0= From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(6+3) + (4+2+1) + (1+6+4+1) = 28 units<\/p>\n We can see the difference between revenue generated by\u00a0Charlie\u00a0and Alfa from remaining categories is 7 units. Hence, we can say that Charlie’s product’s revenue should be 7 units more than\u00a0Alfa’s product’s revenue in Promising category. That is possible only in one case where product 22 is from\u00a0Charlie\u00a0and product 21 is form Alfa. Consequently, we can say that product 23 is from Bravo. Now we have identified each product’s company name we can answer all the questions.<\/p>\n Total revenue generated by Bravo products alone = From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope +\u00a0From Doubtful +\u00a0From Promising<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$ (6+4) + (4) + (9+6+2) + (3) =\u00a0 34 units<\/p>\n One box is equivalent to Rs. 1 crore therefore, we can say that total revenue generated by Bravo = Rs. 34 crores. Hence, option C is the correct answer.<\/p>\n Question 14:\u00a0<\/b>Which of the following statements is NOT correct?<\/p>\n a)\u00a0Alfa’s revenue from Blockbuster products was the same as Charlie’s revenue from Promising products<\/p>\n b)\u00a0Bravo’s revenue from Blockbuster products was greater than Alfa’s revenue from Doubtful products<\/p>\n c)\u00a0Bravo and Charlie had the same revenues from No-hope products<\/p>\n d)\u00a0The total revenue from No-hope products was less than the total revenue from Doubtful products<\/p>\n 14)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(B)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n Let us divide the given figure in four quadrants (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).<\/p>\n Let us solve this problem by considering only one category at a time.<\/p>\n (A) Blockbuster category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 1. Alfa and Bravo had the same number of products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 7 products in Blockbuster\u00a0category.\u00a0Alfa already has two products in blockbuster category. If\u00a0Alfa\u00a0has 3 products in\u00a0blockbuster\u00a0category then Bravo will also have 3 products in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category which is not possible as there are 2 products of Charlie. Hence, we can say that Alfa and Bravo have 2 products each in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category whereas Charlie has 3 products in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 2. It is also given that Charlie had a higher revenue than Bravo from products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n We know that one of the product 1 and 2 is from Charlie and the other is from Bravo.<\/p>\n If product 1 is from Charlie, then we can say that products 1, 7 and 5 are from Charlie. Therefore, revenue generated by products in Charlie category = 2 + 4 + 6 = 12 units. (Assuming area of a square to be 1 unit)<\/p>\n In this case product 2 and product n are from Bravo.Therefore, revenue generated by products in Bravo category = 6 + 9 = 15 units.<\/p>\n We can see that products from\u00a0Charlie have a higher revenue than Bravo. Hence, this case in not possible.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Product 1 is from Bravo and Product 2 is from Charlie. We have determined each product’s company name in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n (B)\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category.<\/p>\n (1)\u00a0Charlie had more products than Bravo but fewer products than Alfa in the No-hope category.\u00a0Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.There are a total of 6 products in no-hope category.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Alfa, Charlie and Bravo have 3, 2 and 1 products in\u00a0No-hope category in that order.<\/p>\n Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.<\/p>\n Revenue generated for\u00a0Bravo\u00a0in the No-hope category = 4 units. We need same revenue for\u00a0Charlie\u00a0which ha s 2 products in this category. Hence, we can say that Product 10 and one of product 8 and 9 is from Charlie and other is from Alfa. Let’s assume that product 8 is from Charlie and product 9 is from Alfa.<\/p>\n (C) Doubtful category:<\/strong>\u00a0We have two information regarding\u00a0Doubtful category.<\/p>\n (1). Charlie did not have any product in the Doubtful category, while Alfa had one product more than Bravo in this category .<\/p>\n (2). Bravo had a higher revenue than Alfa from products in the Doubtful category.<\/p>\n We can see that there are a total of 7 products in this category. Hence, we can say that 4 products are from Alfa and 3 products are from Bravo.<\/p>\n We can see that one of product 14, 15 and 16 is from Bravo company and others are from Alfa company. Bravo will have higher revenue than Alfa only when product no. 14 is from Bravo and others (15 and 16) are from Alfa category.<\/p>\n In this case total revenue by Bravo = Product 14 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 19 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 20 = 9 + 6 + 2 = 17<\/p>\n Similarly, total revenue by Charlie = Product 15 +\u00a0Product 16\u00a0+\u00a0Product 17\u00a0+\u00a0Product 18 = 6 + 1 + 1 + 4 = 12<\/p>\n (D)\u00a0Promising\u00a0category:<\/strong>\u00a0We have only 1 direct information regarding\u00a0Promising\u00a0category.<\/p>\n 1. Each company had an equal number of products in the Promising category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 3 products in promising category with different revenue. Therefore, we can say that each company had 1 product in promising category. We are given that Alfa and Charlie had the same total revenue considering all products. We can calculate the revenue generated by Alfa and Charlie from the products in categories.<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Charlie from all categories except Promising = From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(9+6+2) + (3+1) + (0) = 21 units<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Alfa from\u00a0all categories except Promising\u00a0\u00a0= From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(6+3) + (4+2+1) + (1+6+4+1) = 28 units<\/p>\n We can see the difference between revenue generated by\u00a0Charlie\u00a0and Alfa from remaining categories is 7 units. Hence, we can say that Charlie’s product’s revenue should be 7 units more than\u00a0Alfa’s product’s revenue in Promising category. That is possible only in one case where product 22 is from\u00a0Charlie\u00a0and product 21 is form Alfa. Consequently, we can say that product 23 is from Bravo. Now we have identified each product’s company name we can answer all the questions.<\/p>\n Let us check all options.<\/p>\n Option (A):\u00a0Alfa’s revenue from Blockbuster products was the same as Charlie’s revenue from Promising products<\/p>\n Alfa’s revenue from Blockbuster products = 6 + 3 = 9 units.<\/p>\n Charlie’s revenue from Promising products = 9 units. Hence, this statement is true<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Option (B):\u00a0Bravo’s revenue from Blockbuster products was greater than Alfa’s revenue from Doubtful products.<\/p>\n Bravo’s revenue from Blockbuster products = 6 + 4 = 10 units.<\/p>\n Alfa’s revenue from Doubtful products = 6 + 4 +1 + 1 = 12 units. Hence, this statement is false<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Option (C): Bravo and Charlie had the same revenues from No-hope products.<\/p>\n Bravo’s revenue from No-hope products = 4 units.<\/p>\n Charlie’s revenue from No-hope products = 3 + 1 = 4 units. Hence, this statement is\u00a0true<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Option (D):\u00a0The total revenue from No-hope products was less than the total revenue from Doubtful products<\/p>\n Revenue generated by the products in Doubtful category = 1 + 9 + 4 + 6 + 2 + 1 + 6 = 29 units.<\/p>\n Revenue generated by the products in No-hope category = 4 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 15 units. Hence, this statement is\u00a0true<\/strong>.<\/p>\n We can see that statement mentioned in option B is false. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.<\/p>\n Question 15:\u00a0<\/b>Which of the following is the correct sequence of numbers of products Bravo had in No-hope, Doubtful, Promising and Blockbuster categories respectively?<\/p>\n a)\u00a01,3,1,2<\/p>\n b)\u00a01,3,1,3<\/p>\n c)\u00a03,3,1,2<\/p>\n d)\u00a02,3,1,2<\/p>\n 15)\u00a0Answer\u00a0(A)<\/strong><\/p>\n View Video Solution<\/a><\/p>\n Solution:<\/b><\/p>\n Let us divide the given figure in four quadrants (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).<\/p>\n Let us solve this problem by considering only one category at a time.<\/p>\n (A) Blockbuster category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 1. Alfa and Bravo had the same number of products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 7 products in Blockbuster\u00a0category.\u00a0Alfa already has two products in blockbuster category. If\u00a0Alfa\u00a0has 3 products in\u00a0blockbuster\u00a0category then Bravo will also have 3 products in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category which is not possible as there are 2 products of Charlie. Hence, we can say that Alfa and Bravo have 2 products each in\u00a0Blockbuster\u00a0category whereas Charlie has 3 products in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n 2. It is also given that Charlie had a higher revenue than Bravo from products in the Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n We know that one of the product 1 and 2 is from Charlie and the other is from Bravo.<\/p>\n If product 1 is from Charlie, then we can say that products 1, 7 and 5 are from Charlie. Therefore, revenue generated by products in Charlie category = 2 + 4 + 6 = 12 units. (Assuming area of a square to be 1 unit)<\/p>\n In this case product 2 and product n are from Bravo.Therefore, revenue generated by products in Bravo category = 6 + 9 = 15 units.<\/p>\n We can see that products from\u00a0Charlie have a higher revenue than Bravo. Hence, this case in not possible.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Product 1 is from Bravo and Product 2 is from Charlie. We have determined each product’s company name in Blockbuster category.<\/p>\n (B)\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category<\/strong>: We have two information regarding\u00a0No-hope\u00a0category.<\/p>\n (1)\u00a0Charlie had more products than Bravo but fewer products than Alfa in the No-hope category.\u00a0Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.There are a total of 6 products in no-hope category.<\/p>\n Therefore, we can say that Alfa, Charlie and Bravo have 3, 2 and 1 products in\u00a0No-hope category in that order.<\/p>\n Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.<\/p>\n Revenue generated for\u00a0Bravo\u00a0in the No-hope category = 4 units. We need same revenue for\u00a0Charlie\u00a0which ha s 2 products in this category. Hence, we can say that Product 10 and one of product 8 and 9 is from Charlie and other is from Alfa. Let’s assume that product 8 is from Charlie and product 9 is from Alfa.<\/p>\n (C) Doubtful category:<\/strong> We have two information regarding\u00a0Doubtful category.<\/p>\n (1). Charlie did not have any product in the Doubtful category, while Alfa had one product more than Bravo in this category .<\/p>\n (2). Bravo had a higher revenue than Alfa from products in the Doubtful category.<\/p>\n We can see that there are a total of 7 products in this category. Hence, we can say that 4 products are from Alfa and 3 products are from Bravo.<\/p>\n We can see that one of product 14, 15 and 16 is from Bravo company and others are from Alfa company. Bravo will have higher revenue than Alfa only when product no. 14 is from Bravo and others (15 and 16) are from Alfa category.<\/p>\n In this case total revenue by Bravo = Product 14 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 19 +\u00a0\u00a0Product 20 = 9 + 6 + 2 = 17<\/p>\n Similarly, total revenue by Charlie = Product 15 +\u00a0Product 16\u00a0+\u00a0Product 17\u00a0+\u00a0Product 18 = 6 + 1 + 1 + 4 = 12<\/p>\n (D)\u00a0Promising\u00a0category:<\/strong> We have only 1 direct information regarding\u00a0Promising\u00a0category.<\/p>\n 1. Each company had an equal number of products in the Promising category.<\/p>\n There are a total of 3 products in promising category with different revenue. Therefore, we can say that each company had 1 product in promising category. We are given that Alfa and Charlie had the same total revenue considering all products. We can calculate the revenue generated by Alfa and Charlie from the products in categories.<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Charlie from all categories except Promising = From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(9+6+2) + (3+1) + (0) = 21 units<\/p>\n Revenue generated by Alfa from\u00a0all categories except Promising\u00a0\u00a0= From Blockbuster +\u00a0From No-hope + From Doubtful<\/p>\n $\\Rightarrow$\u00a0(6+3) + (4+2+1) + (1+6+4+1) = 28 units<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/21741.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/image_UXG8fbK.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/image_SRpxoef.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/Ab.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/aB.png\")
<\/figure>\n
\nIt is known that
\n1. The percentage profit for the store in 2016 was 100%.
\n2. The store\u2019s revenue doubled from 2016 to 2017, and its cost doubled from 2016 to 2018.
\n3. There was no profit from the Electronics department in 2017.
\n4. In 2018, the revenue from the Clothing department was the same as the cost incurred in the Produce department.<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/CAT%20QUE%202.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/CAT%20que%202.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/CAt%20que%2022.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n
\nProfit in the electronic department in 2016= 100-30=70
\nThe total profits= for the store in 2016 were from the Electronics department 70%<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/image_dF2VXTZ.png\")
<\/figure>\n
\nAs deviation is +25% so average 2009 – 2018 is 600\/1.25 = 480
\nLPA 2019 = (480\u00d710 – 500 + 600 )\/10 = 490mm<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/Q1_PhPyUpr.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/16507.png\")
The following facts are known:1. Alfa and Bravo had the same number of products in the Blockbuster category.
\n2. Charlie had more products than Bravo but fewer products than Alfa in the No-hope category.
\n3. Each company had an equal number of products in the Promising category.
\n4. Charlie did not have any product in the Doubtful category, while Alfa had one product more than Bravo in this category
\n5. Bravo had a higher revenue than Alfa from products in the Doubtful category.
\n6. Charlie had a higher revenue than Bravo from products in the Blockbuster category.
\n7. Bravo and Charlie had the same revenue from products in the No-hope category.
\n8. Alfa and Charlie had the same total revenue considering all products.<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
<\/figure>\n
![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/XAT.PNG\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/97158.png\")
<\/figure>\n![](\"https:\/\/cracku.in\/media\/uploads\/image_JYiXJhE.png\")
<\/figure>\n