• Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT

Canned Tuna

This topic has 1 expert reply and 12 member replies

Canned Tuna

Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:18 pm
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its canned tuna. Last year Dietz sold 12 million cans
    of tuna compared to the 10 million sold during the previous year, an increase directly attributable to new customers
    brought in by the campaign. Profits from the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the
    advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests.
    92
    Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
    (A) Sales of canned tuna account for a relatively small percentage of Dietz Foods' profits.
    (8) Most of the people who bought Dietz's canned tuna for the first time as a result of the campaign were already loyal
    customers of other Dietz products. 3
    (C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned
    tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.
    (D) Dietz made money on sales of canned tuna last year.
    (E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of canned tuna.

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    papgust Community Manager
    Joined
    10 Aug 2009
    Posted:
    1537 messages
    Followed by:
    240 members
    Thanked:
    649 times
    Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:25 pm
    Answer must be E here

    If there is a steep decline in sales of canned tuna in each of the last 5 years, then the advertising campaign has very much helped the company to increase its sales and thereby enhancing economic interests of Dietz's food.

    Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:57 pm
    papgust wrote:
    Answer must be E here

    If there is a steep decline in sales of canned tuna in each of the last 5 years, then the advertising campaign has very much helped the company to increase its sales and thereby enhancing economic interests of Dietz's food.
    Why is C wrong...??

    If a less expensive campaign would have brought less customers and we know that the increase in sale is due
    to newly added customers.. then this campaign has helped ..!!

    Thanks

    papgust Community Manager
    Joined
    10 Aug 2009
    Posted:
    1537 messages
    Followed by:
    240 members
    Thanked:
    649 times
    Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:17 pm
    IMO C neither weakens nor strenghtens the argument. We are only looking to undermine the argument that campaign did nothing to further economic interests. We are not concerned whether a less expensive campaign would have brought in new customers or an expensive campaign would have brought in more new customers.

    mehravikas Legendary Member Default Avatar
    Joined
    12 May 2008
    Posted:
    1161 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    23 times
    Test Date:
    ********
    Target GMAT Score:
    740
    Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:32 pm
    Agree. The answer should be E.

    papgust wrote:
    IMO C neither weakens nor strenghtens the argument. We are only looking to undermine the argument that campaign did nothing to further economic interests. We are not concerned whether a less expensive campaign would have brought in new customers or an expensive campaign would have brought in more new customers.

    Post Sat Jan 09, 2010 2:35 am
    OA E

    thanks all for sharing your point of view

    kvcpk Legendary Member
    Joined
    30 May 2010
    Posted:
    1893 messages
    Followed by:
    6 members
    Thanked:
    215 times
    Post Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:47 am
    Sorry.. I am reopening this thread..

    Can someone tell me why option A is wrong? There is no mention that canned tuna is the only product of deitz foods.

    SmarpanGamt Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    08 Mar 2010
    Posted:
    203 messages
    Thanked:
    6 times
    Test Date:
    1.12.10
    Target GMAT Score:
    720
    Post Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:00 am
    kvcpk wrote:
    Sorry.. I am reopening this thread..

    Can someone tell me why option A is wrong? There is no mention that canned tuna is the only product of deitz foods.
    The argument is on Campaign cost and econmonic of campaign cost t odirect sales. Other products will neither strength or weaken the argument.

    singalong Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    09 Feb 2011
    Posted:
    95 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Thu Jul 28, 2011 5:07 am
    But if the sales made were a part of the profits, which is apparently less, then wouldn't be the reason why the campaign didn't help in the process?

    mankey Legendary Member Default Avatar
    Joined
    23 Jun 2011
    Posted:
    627 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    4 times
    Post Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:22 pm
    Someone please provide OA for this one.

    Thanks.

    singalong Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    09 Feb 2011
    Posted:
    95 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Sat Jan 14, 2012 7:24 pm
    a little help here experts..

    Joseph_Alexander Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    14 May 2014
    Posted:
    45 messages
    Thanked:
    1 times
    Post Thu Nov 20, 2014 5:21 am
    I was stuck between E and C here.

    I eliminated E thinking that in the last 5 years (including the year in which 12MN (Yr 5 - and not Yr6) and 10MN (Yr 4) tins were sold) the industry was in a declining trend. So had the company not advertised so heavily in Yr 5, its sales would have been much lesser than 10MN tins, may be say 8MN tins (if the industry decline rate was 20%). Just because it advertised heavily it had 20% more sales than each of its competitors is the market. This certainly now is an economic benefit! Very Happy

    Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:34 am
    Is letter A wrong?
    I assume Dietz Foods also has other products..

    GMAT/MBA Expert

    Post Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:36 am
    We want to weaken the argument that the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests. In other words, we want to support the argument that the campaign did further Dietz's economic interests.

    Answer choice A is out of scope. Looking at the passage, we see that the campaign was for Dietz's canned tuna, not for any of its other products. Whether or not Dietz sells additional products, this question is about how a canned tuna campaign improves canned tuna sales. If this statement is true, Dietz still paid more for the canned tuna campaign than it got in canned tuna sales. Maybe since Dietz has other products, it isn't as big of a loss, but it's still a loss.

    Answer choice C is similar. A less expensive campaign may have brought in fewer customers. That doesn't change anything about the campaign Dietz actually ran! Even if the campaign earned Dietz more customers than a less expensive campaign would have, the gain from the new customers is still lower than what Dietz spent on the campaign. A less expensive campaign may have been even less successful, but the campaign that actually happened still lost Dietz money.

    _________________


    Erika John - Content Manager/Lead Instructor
    http://gmat.prepscholar.com/gmat/s/

    Learn about our exclusive savings for BTG members (up to 25% off) and our 5 day free trial

    Read our expert guides on the PrepScholar GMAT blog

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 Vincen 180 topics
    2 lheiannie07 61 topics
    3 Roland2rule 54 topics
    4 ardz24 44 topics
    5 VJesus12 14 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    155 posts
    2 image description Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

    EMPOWERgmat

    105 posts
    3 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    101 posts
    4 image description Jay@ManhattanReview

    Manhattan Review

    82 posts
    5 image description Matt@VeritasPrep

    Veritas Prep

    80 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts