• 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
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT
  • 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
  • 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
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

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

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider

In order to reduce the number of items

This topic has 8 member replies
kvcpk Legendary Member
Joined
30 May 2010
Posted:
1893 messages
Followed by:
6 members
Thanked:
215 times

In order to reduce the number of items

Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:59 am
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company’s packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

    Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants’ recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

    (A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor.

    (B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock.

    (C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package.

    (D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit.

    (E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received.


    There is no mention of "compression of package material" in the Passage. In that case how can we chose B. What is wrong with option C ?

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    hardik.jadeja Legendary Member
    Joined
    08 Jun 2007
    Posted:
    535 messages
    Followed by:
    5 members
    Thanked:
    87 times
    Test Date:
    21-08-2010
    GMAT Score:
    730
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:37 am
    IMO B.

    I think "fill any empty spaces in its cartons." implies that packing material is compressed too densely.

    I think C is not the answer because we are trying to address the problem of reducing the number of items damaged while in transit to customers. So the customers damaging the product while opening it is out of scope.

    Hope that helps..

    selango Legendary Member
    Joined
    29 Dec 2009
    Posted:
    1460 messages
    Followed by:
    7 members
    Thanked:
    135 times
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:39 am
    The question ask you the assume which of the options if true explain the consultant rec failure.That means we need to assume the other reason for failure.

    Option B tell us that losing capacity to absorb shock which leads to damage of items.

    The argument tell us the items damaged while passing or in transport to customers.
    So items damaged while unpacking is not valid.

    pnk Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    17 Jul 2009
    Posted:
    292 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    6 times
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:43 am
    [quote="kvcpk"]In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company’s packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

    Argu only abt 'damaged items'

    Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants’ recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

    (A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor. (expenditure not in scope)

    (B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. (possible...using synonym of 'used as much material as they cud')
    (C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. (unpacking not in scope. customer's concerned with only damaged items')

    (D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit. (obvious from agru...no additional info why recommendation failed)

    (E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received. (no info why recommendation failed...or why damaged items rose)

    nikhilkatira Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
    Joined
    13 Jul 2009
    Posted:
    318 messages
    Thanked:
    12 times
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:48 am
    kvcpk wrote:
    In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company’s packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

    Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants’ recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

    (A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor.

    (B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock.

    (C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not significantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package.

    (D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit.

    (E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received.


    There is no mention of "compression of package material" in the Passage. In that case how can we chose B. What is wrong with option C ?
    The argument is regarding reducing the number of items being damaged in transit.

    _________________
    Best,
    Nikhil H. Katira

    kvcpk Legendary Member
    Joined
    30 May 2010
    Posted:
    1893 messages
    Followed by:
    6 members
    Thanked:
    215 times
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:50 am
    "customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
    All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

    Why I did not choose Option B:

    "When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

    Why I chose C:

    Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
    "The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

    Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!

    hardik.jadeja Legendary Member
    Joined
    08 Jun 2007
    Posted:
    535 messages
    Followed by:
    5 members
    Thanked:
    87 times
    Test Date:
    21-08-2010
    GMAT Score:
    730
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:08 am
    kvcpk wrote:
    "customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
    All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

    Why I did not choose Option B:

    "When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

    Why I chose C:

    Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
    "The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

    Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!
    "fill any empty spaces in its cartons" and "the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could." imply that packing material is compressed too densely. Sometimes we have to infer certain things that are not mentioned in the passage explicitly.

    C is certainly out of scope. We are concerned about products getting damaged while in transit to customers. Unpacking not in scope. Plus, option C doesn't say that customers are damaging the goods while opening it. It just says that it's not easy for them to unpack the product. Whereas B provides reasoning(loss of capacity to absorb shock) why more products could get damaged in transit.

    Hope that helps..

    kvcpk Legendary Member
    Joined
    30 May 2010
    Posted:
    1893 messages
    Followed by:
    6 members
    Thanked:
    215 times
    Post Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:37 am
    hardik.jadeja wrote:
    kvcpk wrote:
    "customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
    All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

    Why I did not choose Option B:

    "When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

    Why I chose C:

    Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
    "The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

    Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!
    "fill any empty spaces in its cartons" and "the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could." imply that packing material is compressed too densely. Sometimes we have to infer certain things that are not mentioned in the passage explicitly.

    C is certainly out of scope. We are concerned about products getting damaged while in transit to customers. Unpacking not in scope. Plus, option C doesn't say that customers are damaging the goods while opening it. It just says that it's not easy for them to unpack the product. Whereas B provides reasoning(loss of capacity to absorb shock) why more products could get damaged in transit.

    Hope that helps..
    Yeah.. I am convinced.. Thank you!!

    missionGMAT007 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    20 Jun 2009
    Posted:
    135 messages
    Thanked:
    4 times
    Target GMAT Score:
    750
    Post Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:01 am
    IMO B
    C is out of scope

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 Vincen 132 topics
    2 lheiannie07 65 topics
    3 LUANDATO 54 topics
    4 Roland2rule 43 topics
    5 ardz24 40 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    133 posts
    2 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    114 posts
    3 image description EconomistGMATTutor

    The Economist GMAT Tutor

    113 posts
    4 image description Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

    EMPOWERgmat

    109 posts
    5 image description DavidG@VeritasPrep

    Veritas Prep

    72 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts