At a party, there were a total of 60 people. They had two brands of drinks to choose from. Out of two drinks, 30 people chose the Pepsi brand, 16 chose both Pepsi and Coke brand. Find the number of people who chose coke, if each person chose at least one brand.  

At a party, there were a total of 60 people. They had two brands of drinks to choose from. Out of two drinks, 30 people chose the Pepsi brand, 16 chose both Pepsi and Coke brand. Find the number of people who chose coke, if each person chose at least one brand.   Correct Answer 46

Given :

There were total of 60 people at the party

30 people chose the Pepsi brand.

16 people chose both brands 

Calculations :

[ alt="F1 Harshit 22.3.21 Pallavi D1" src="//storage.googleapis.com/tb-img/production/21/03/F1_Harshit_22.3.21_Pallavi_D1.png" style="width: 181px; height: 160px;">

Pepsi is chosen by 30 people 

Number of people who chose pepsi only = 30 - 16 

⇒ 14 

Number of people who chose coke = Total people - People who chose pepsi only

⇒ 60 - 14 

⇒ 46 

∴ There were total 46 people who would choose coke 

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: As a trade war looms, one of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s biggest weapons could be boycotts of American brands by his country’s legion of consumers. But Xi would also be risking collateral damage at home, The China operations of all-American brands ranging from Coca-Cola Co. and McDonald’s Corp. to Walt Disney Co. are co-owned by state-backed Chinese firms.  Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner? Arguments: I. One of Coke’s main China partners is government-backed COFCO Corp., Shanghai Disneyland is part owned by a local consortium, and McDonald’s franchisee in the country is controlled by state-backed conglomerate Citic Ltd. and private-equity firm Citic Capital Holdings.  II. Even when Chinese companies don’t have direct ownership links with U.S. brands, boycotts or other non-tariff retaliation would hit the local partners of those American companies. III. The number of big clean wins in terms of striking against the other guy (American brands) - without accidentally punching your own guy (Chinese firms) in the face - is extremely large.