Another for C


Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich. - This statement gives a different cause to why stores in Martin are thriving. Therefore, this statement weakens the argument the most. Even if the roads were widened, greater purchasing power in Martin is the reason why these stores are so profitable.

The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing rather than on purchasing new merchandise. - This doesn't give a reason why stores in Martin are thriving nor why widening roads will help.

Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened. - We don't know if Martin's roads are congested. In fact, these roads were already widened. We also do not know the purchasing power of Ipswich. What if the the purchasing power of Ipswich is minimal? A slight increase in profits doesn't tell us much. I also feel that this answer is a trap. This answer choice uses the verbiage as in the question and would make the test taker to immediately choose this option.

The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?

The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.
The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.
Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing rather than on purchasing new merchandise.
Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.

The assumption here is that there is a link between the widening of the ROAD between IPSWICH and MARTIN and the thriving stores in IPSWICH.
The correct answer must break this link.

Answer choice E: Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
Thus, widening the road between IPSWICH and MARTIN did NOT benefit the stores in MARTIN.
A road goes BOTH WAYS: if the stores in IPSWICH are thriving because of the road, why aren't the stores in MARTIN?
The implication is that there is ANOTHER REASON that the stores in IPSWICH are thriving, invalidating the conclusion that widening the road between Ipswich and RODWAY will help the stores in Rodway.

The correct answer is E.

Answer choice C: Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
Since widening the road between Martin and Ipswich likely made it easier for the wealthy residents of Martin to patronize the stores in Ipswich -- and the stores in Ipswich are thriving, despite the lack of purchasing power there -- the implication is that the stores in Ipswich are thriving BECAUSE OF THE ROAD.
Thus, this answer choice SUPPORTS the conclusion that widening the road between Martin and Rodway will help the stores in Rodway.
Eliminate C.

GMATGuruNY wrote: Answer choice C: Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
Since widening the road between Martin and Ipswich likely made it easier for the wealthy residents of Martin to patronize the stores in Ipswich -- and the stores in Ipswich are thriving, despite the lack of purchasing power there -- the implication is that the stores in Ipswich are thriving BECAUSE OF THE ROAD.
Thus, this answer choice SUPPORTS the conclusion that widening the road between Martin and Rodway will help the stores in Rodway.
Eliminate C.

C)Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.

I have a doubt here. Since you said the road between Martin and Rodway will help the Rodway stores & not road between Ipswich & Rodway. So, that's what makes choice C cast the most serious doubt on the conclusion: "Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened." and that's what the questions asks for. What am I missing here?

My doubt with option E: E)Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
Here road between M-I goes both ways and if one of the two city's stores get benefited then it does cast SOME doubt on the conclusion but in this race of weakening, C definitely wins over E

Please help me understand the two choices, C & E, better. thank you.