In 2003, the Making Hits Record Company

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members
In 2003, the Making Hits Record Company spent 40% of its total budget on the production of ten albums, 30% of its budget on the marketing of these albums, and the remainder of its budget on overhead costs. In the same year, the Song Factory Record Company spent 20% of its total budget on the production of 10 albums and 60% of its budget on the marketing of these albums. Making Hits sold a total of 800,000 copies of the ten records it produced in 2003, while the Song Factory sold a total of 1,600,000 copies of the ten records it produced in 2003.

Assuming each company met its budget, which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information given above?

(A) The amount of money spent on marketing is directly related to the number of copies sold.
(B) Making Hits spent more money on the production of its albums in 2003 than did the Song Factory.
(C) Song Factory's total revenue from the sale of albums produced in 2003 was higher than that of Making Hits.
(D) In 2003, Making Hits spent a larger percentage of its budget on overhead costs than did the Song Factory.
(E) The Song Factory sold more copies of its 2003 albums than Making Hits did because the Song Factory
spent a higher percentage of its budget on the marketing of its albums.

What is wrong with the other options?

OA D

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:02 am
Location: Global
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:770

by elias.latour.apex » Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:05 pm
We are being asked to draw a conclusion that is completely supported by the text. The text contains a lot of numbers, but the numbers are relative information (percentages). There is not a single dollar figure in the information.

Option A asks us to extend the situation found in the text into a generalization of all music sales. However, we cannot do so because we do not know that either of these companies is typical of the industry. We have no information about that.

Option B asks us to draw an inference with discrete numbers (a total dollar figure) when all we have is relative information (percentages). Without at least one discrete piece of information, we can only make relative statements.

Option C asks us to draw a conclusion about the money made when we have no discrete dollar figures. Since we have no information about dollars, we cannot do so.

Option D is the credited response. All we need to know is that all percentages add up to 100 percent. We can then calculate that Making Hits Company spent 30% of its budget on overhead whereas The Song Factory spent only 20%

Option E asks us to infer a causal relationship between two pieces of information when information about what causes what is not in the text. We cannot assume that one thing causes another just because they occurred together.
Elias Latour
Verbal Specialist @ ApexGMAT
blog.apexgmat.com
+1 (646) 736-7622