BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

1000 CR TEST I Q 18

Expert replies
by [email protected] » Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:05 am
Critics of sales seminars run by outside consultants point out that since 1987, revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees attended consultant-led seminars were lower than revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees did not attend such seminars. The critics charge that for vacuum cleaner companies, the sales seminars are ill conceived and a waste of money.
Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to the critics of sales seminars?
(A) Those vacuum cleaner companies whose sales were highest prior to 1987 are the only companies that did not send employees to the seminars.
(B) Vacuum cleaner companies that have sent employees to sales seminars since 1987 experienced a greater drop in sales than they had prior to 1987.
(C) The cost of vacuum cleaner sales seminars run by outside consultants has risen dramatically since 1987.
(D) The poor design of vacuum cleaner sales seminars is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.
(E) Since 1987, sales of vacuum cleaners have risen twenty percent.



Please explain the answer too
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Re: 1000 CR TEST I Q 18

by veekay » Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:55 am
Should be E

a) talks about pre 1987 but critics talk about post 1987

b) Support the argument

c) On the whole, doesn't weaken the argument. Cost has increased but was it worth it. Moreover doesn't counter "ill conceived" argument

d) Supports the argument as it agrees that seminar is ineffective but because of reasons other than design

e) If the sales has increased, then the seminar is not ill conceived and a waste of money
Join the discussion

by agps » Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:12 am
I think it's C.

(A) irrelevent, talks about a period prior to 1987.
(B) strengthens the argument.
(C) This is a cost for the company, the revenues are the sales minus the costs, if the seminar costs have increades, then, even if the companies sell more they'll have have less revenue.
(D) strengthens the argument saying that the problem is in the seminars.
(E) strengthens the argument, sales ar up, but why companies that send salesmen to seminars have less revenues.

There might be a flaw in my reasoning, i am assuming that by revenues they mean net income, but i excluded all the rest for the given reasons.
what is the OA?
Join the discussion

1000 CR TEST I Q 18

by [email protected] » Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:30 pm
No,The OA is A
I am looking for a good explanation
Join the discussion

by dineshra » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:26 am
(A) The critics are comparing the sales of the higest sales company with those of the companies not doing so well.

Year1: Let's say company A was already making 100K a year and decided to not send its salesppl for the seminar. Year2 sales are still 100K. No improvement

Company B was making 10K a year(year1). After sending its sales folks to the seminar, it started making 50K a year(year2). This is a great improvement of 400% increase in sales(i.e. Revenue). However this is still less than Year2 sales of Company A.

The comparison is illogical. It's not apples to apples anymore. The critics should have chosen to compare the growth in sales instead.

So the answer is A

(B) It weakens the argument
(C) Cost is irrelevant. Profits = Rev - Cost. We are not discussing profits. Only revenues.
(D) We are trying to challenge the critics NOT support them.
(E) Overall increase in sales don't reflect the performance of a particular company's sales team.
Join the discussion

by graem83d » Tue May 03, 2016 3:46 am
I agree with option A.
Join the discussion