For the past two years, when we analyzed the CAT, our was analysis different from that of others. We did not specifically try to be different. But we faced a lot of criticism. People asked, "How can a new institute dare to disagree with the giants." But we do not think of them as giants, but as dinosaurs -- their day of glory is gone. Each time we were proven right. This year too, we intend to be right. (We got CAT 2006 right and we got CAT 2007 right.)

Just two days before CAT 2008, our founder, in an interivew to Mint, advocated that the level of English and Math be lower, and guess what, that is what happened.

Today, we are faced with a similar predicament. Though the number of question in English increased from 25 to 40 and the level of difficulty fell down, most coaching institutes maintain that the cut-off is likely to be around 45 (out of 160). We find this ridiculous and feel that the cutoff for IIM-A would cross 60.

CAT 2008 Analysis
Coming in a few minutes, including answer key and cut-offs.

90 Qs, 150 min. 360 marks (25% negative for wrong answers) 3 sections, No sectional time limits 5 choices per question (including in Data Sufficiency for the first time)

Likely Cut-Offs Quant: 36 DI: 32 Verbal: 60 Find that too high? Read our comments above. Overall Cutoff for at least 1 IIM call: 130. Overall Cutoff for IIM A call: 155.

English Got Much Easier, Math a Bit Easier, DI Was Troublesome, Overall Cutoff to Increase

Quant The general opinion is that the Quant section was relatively easier. We believe that this was largely driven by the fact that there were a couple of questions that were quite easy. Of course there were a couple of tough ones too. The break up of the Quant section was: Numbers: 8 (incl 2 DS) Qs, Algebra: 6 Qs, PermComb: 3 Qs, Geometry: 5 Qs, Analytical Reasoning: 2 Qs, Arithmetic: 1 Q. In fact this classification was not water tight. For e.g., the question that we have classified as Arithmetic (speed-distance) also had a healthy dose of Geometry in the same question. As we have always maintained, despite its famed notoriety, CAT always gives some really easy question. Of the 25 questions this year, there were 3 that were unbelievably easy. The first one of these was about the first 40 natural numbers written on the board, and then a certain operation performed on them 39 times. The answer was simply (1 + 2 + 3 + ... + 40) – 39 = 781. The second real easy question was the one where we had to find the number of common terms between two series: (17, 21, 25, ..., 417) and (16, 21, 26, ..., 466). Since the first series is in jumps of 4 and the second in jumps of 5, and the first common term is 21, the common terms will be 21, 21+20=41, 41+20=61, 61+20=81, ... 381+20=421, thereby giving 20 terms. The third one of these really easy questions was one where you had to find the number of unique integers you could form using 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 where repetition is allowed, such that the integers are > 999 and <= 4000. The trick was to notice that 4000 was permitted. Other than this, the Quant section followed the Peak Seekers prediction with its emphasis on Numbers, Algebra and Geometry. Our Expectation From Students of Peak Seekers: You should have attempted 14 of the 25 questions. From those 14, you should have got 10 right, yielding a score of 36 after negative marking.

Data Interpretation The Data Interpretation (DI) section has been largely regarded as being tough. This is something we can agree with, solely on the basis of the fact that there was a huge "interpretation" angle to many questions. The break up of the 25 Qs in the DI of CAT 2008 was: Analytical Reasoning: 7 Qs, XY graph: 3 Qs, Table: 6 Qs, Bar Graph: 4 Qs, Caselet: 5 Qs. Those students who enjoy Analytical Reasoning (AR) would find the AR questions in CAT 2008 a breeze. The height, location, and side of the road question for 6 houses was not tough. Likewise for the set on the sports event with 6 teams. The problem with AR as with the rest of DI was that each set had few questions. Most students expect 5 questions per set. Hence the fact that CAT 2008 had 7 sets of questions was irksome. Interpreting the data in the XY graph question (the one on the revenue of telecom operators) as well as the share trader's caslet, were tough to understand. Once you understood the data, answering the questions was not tough. But that interpretation itself was tough. The tables and bar graph sets did not have a single question with "None of these" as an option. This permitted students to make approximation and guesses. Additionally, in most cases, the numerical answer choices were sufficiently apart, thereby facilitating approximation. The set with the table about 100 employees in an organization, as well as the set with the bar graph had several questions that were difficult to understand. Unlike the AR and XY graph, where the data was tough to understand, in these sets it was the questions that were tough to understand. Our Expectation From Students of Peak Seekers: Of the 25 questions, you should have attempted 13. Of these 13 you should have got 9 correct, thereby yielding a 32 after negative marking.

Verbal The English section has largely been regarded as easier than usual. The break up of the 40 Qs was: Grammar (including spellings): 4 Qs, Commonly Confused Words: 4 Qs, Usage of Vocabulary: 8 Qs, Paragraph Completion: 4 Qs, Reading Comprehension: 20 Qs (4 passages of 5 Qs each). The exceptionally high focus on words (vocabulary) is one of the outstanding features of this CAT. Luckily the vocabulary questions were not based on direct meaning (e.g. synonyms, antonyms) but instead focused on usage. We specifically enjoyed the questions on the various types of usages of words such as "Run", "Round", "Buckle" and "File". Questions that tested the students on similar sounding words was a mixed bag. Unlike CAT 2007 where this question type focused on words with similar meaning e.g., "further vs farther", this time around CAT even used similar sounding, though unrelated, words, e.g., "broach vs brooch". Most of the word related questions were of low level of difficulty. Grammar questions, expecting people to identify errors, also alerted students to spelling mistakes, though the only one they introduced was in misspelling "imigrant". Several interesting usage errors were introduced. One had no choice but to take liberal assistance of the choices to select the answer. Errors were of different types: number(singular-plural), tense, article-usage, idiomatic usage. CAT 2008 was a delight for Reading Comprehension (RC) lovers. At least 3 of the 4 passages could be classified as moderately easy. And turning the clock back, several RC questions were direct. This goes against the trend of making RC entirely analytical (or indirect). Students who dislike RC in general would also have been able to attempt a sizeable number of questions. Our Expectation From Students of Peak Seekers: Of the 4 RC passages, one should have attempted at least 2. Of the 20 remaining English questions, one should have attempted 14 questions. Of these 24 questions that one attempted, one should have obtained at least 17 right, thereby yielding 61 marks after negative marks.

The cutoffs above are based on initial reactions and our expert judgment. As is obvious, cutoffs are dependant on how well the top CAT attempters do. In the 2-3 days following CAT 2008, our team will be collecting data from all over India and there is a chance that we might revise our estimates.

Peak Seekers: Borivli: 32187711 | Thane: 25305800 | Vile Parle: 26108002 | Vashi: 27888097 | Dombivli: 95251-2488800 | Pune: 020-64166220

All that is stated above is an opinion. Before making any significant career decisions, please consult a counselor at Peak Seekers.