The high cost of productions is severely limiting which oper

[BTGmoderatorAT]

The high cost of productions is severely limiting which operas are available to the public. These costs necessitate reliance on large corporate sponsors, who in return demand that only the most famous operas be produced. Determining which operas will be produced should rest only with ticket purchasers at the box office, not with large corporate sponsors. If we reduce production budgets so that operas can be supported exclusively by box-office receipts and donations from individuals, then the public will be able to see less famous operas.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument?

(A) A few ticket purchasers go to the opera for the sake of going to the opera, not to see specific operatic productions.

(B) The reduction of opera production budgets would not reduce the desire of large corporate sponsors to support operas.

(C) Without the support of large corporate sponsors, opera companies could not afford to produce any but the most famous of operas.

(D) Large corporate sponsors will stop supporting opera productions if they are denied control over which operas will be produced.

(E) The combination of individual donations and box-office receipts cannot match the amounts of money obtained through sponsorship by large corporations.

Confused between C and E. Can any experts help?

[EconomistGMATTutor]

The conclusion: If we reduce production budgets so that operas can be supported exclusively by box-office receipts and donations from individuals, then the public will be able to see less famous operas.

The evidence: The high cost of productions is severely limiting which operas are available to the public. These costs necessitate reliance on large corporate sponsors, who in return demand that only the most famous operas be produced.

Key assumption: Without corporate sponsors, operas can produce less-famous operas.

To weaken the conclusion, we'll go right after the assumption. If opera companies cannot afford to produce less-famous operas without corporate sponsors, then budget reductions will not lead to people seeing these less-famous operas. The opera companies will stick to the famous stuff. This weakens the conclusion.

Choice E was asked about. This says that the money taken in at the box-office and through individual donations can't match the corporate sponsorship money. But that's not what's relevant. If the box-office/donation income was 89% of corporate dollars, would that be enough? Could less-famous operas then be produced profitably? We can't answer this question from the evidence, so we can't say that this would weaken (or strengthen) the conclusion. Maybe less-famous operas could still be produced.

.

[EconomistGMATTutor]

I'm available if you'd like any follow up.