madhur_ahuja wrote:

gmat740 wrote:Next one comes from Japan

IMO B

Please State the reason for choosing a particular answer and rejecting others. That would help everyone to develop strategies for attacking CR's

B for me too.

premise: how english poets classify poems as haiku (japanese tradition) poems.
conclusion: english poets disregard foreign tradition.
=>the conclusion makes a sweeping generalization. B fits in fine

Yes Scooby the answer is B

Now we can have a good discussion with the next Question.

Clearly the two strong contenders are A and C. So lets just focus on both these options

gmat740 wrote:Yes Scooby the answer is B

Now we can have a good discussion with the next Question.

Clearly the two strong contenders are A and C. So lets just focus on both these options

IMO A

A seems to be only choice. C talks about patients deciding the thoroughness of the physician, which seems to be irrelevant.

A is correct. The explanation is given below.

A – is CORRECT as if the patients are not aware of any problem and don’t feel ill, physicians can definitely discover the symptoms of the serious disease at its early stage. This weakens the conclusion
B – is wrong as if the average amount of time physicians spend on medical checkups is decreasing, they are becoming less thorough and are more likely to miss symptoms of a disease
C – is wrong as we need to weaken the conclusion that it is unwise for patients to have medical checkups if they don’t feel it and the degree of thoroughness is not appropriate for this reason
D – is wrong because whether or not people are financially unable to afford regular medical checkups is out of scope in the argument
E – it wrong because the fact that some physicians sometimes choose the right degree of medical checkups doesn’t weak the conclusion of the argument

What about E.
IMO E could be the answer..

A seems better than C

C. out of scope. stimulus says it is difficult for physicians to judge how thorough they should be. C talks about patients instead

A. gives a reason why it is wise to for checkups even when one is not ill. weakens the conclusion.

gmat740 wrote:Next one comes from Japan

B should be the ans...

the article doesn't mention any disrespect while the matter is being discussed...so the evidence doesn't support the conclusion..

I will say A it seems more logical since we are talking about weakening the argument, this one definitively does the job!

I hope I am right because I have missed the previous ones, are this the "hard" type of CR questions? because if not I am toasted!

Yes OA for the previous one is A

Time for the next one.

By the way, I just posted a RC, please check the link below.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/tough-rc-t41049.html#171140

Its a difficult RC.Any takers for that.??

I think C is the correct answer because it mentions the Merging of companies which the argument relates as to purchsaing competitors as its option and this gives the weakening evidence of Mergers having proved not being a productive option in the past.

would go for D

A, B, E are out of scope.

C: we do not know if the mentioned mergers happened in the carpet industry, and if the same will happen to the carpet industry. the carpet industry may well be unique

D. price cutting=> other firms leave=>market share increases for the firms that go for price cutting. gives an alternate way of increasing market share. weakens the conclusion

gmat740, excellent thread!!!!!

IMO C, since the conclusion states that M&A is the solution to gain market share. however, if after some M&A the companies involved in it had lower revenues, threfore it will have higher SGA (since when mergering, it has a considerable debt burden at the beginning of the operations), consequently it will register lower EBITDA and net income.

Yes it should be D

if more companies are leaving the market... the market share of remaining companies will increase automatically... thus buying Competitors is not the ONLY was to get market share...