Critical Reasoning

A famous football player recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using an actor in a fundraising event to appear as a football player to sign autographs and take pictures with attendees. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using actors to impersonate famous athletes. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since actual famous athlete costs more than that of impersonating actor.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Most attendees are unable to distinguish a famous athlete from a impersonating actor.
(B) Events using famous athletes are usually more successfull than those that use impersonating actors.
(C) Some famous atheltes who would be popular at such events are ill at present.
(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to impersonate famous athletes but will do so with the disclosure that the actors are not real athletes.
(E) Events will continue to attract attendees with the opportunity to recieve an autograph by and a a picture with a famous athlete.

-> OA: E

My reasoning:
Conclusion: Costs of event will rise because real athletes cost more than impersonating actors.

A: Attendees unable to distinguish does not tells us if cost will rise or not.
B: Events are succesfull if real athletes are used. This sounds promising.
C. irrelevant
D. irrelevant to cost rise if events use impersonators with disclosure or not
E. Attendees will be attracted if real athletes will be used -> more attendees -> more revenue -> cost will be less. so weakens.

As per my reasoning the answer is B. Can some experts help.

gmatjeet wrote:A famous football player recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using an actor in a fundraising event to appear as a football player to sign autographs and take pictures with attendees. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using actors to impersonate famous athletes. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since actual famous athlete costs more than that of impersonating actor.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Most attendees are unable to distinguish a famous athlete from a impersonating actor.
(B) Events using famous athletes are usually more successfull than those that use impersonating actors.
(C) Some famous atheltes who would be popular at such events are ill at present.
(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to impersonate famous athletes but will do so with the disclosure that the actors are not real athletes.
(E) Events will continue to attract attendees with the opportunity to recieve an autograph by and a a picture with a famous athlete.

-> OA: E

My reasoning:
Conclusion: Costs of event will rise because real athletes cost more than impersonating actors.

A: Attendees unable to distinguish does not tells us if cost will rise or not.
B: Events are succesfull if real athletes are used. This sounds promising.
C. irrelevant
D. irrelevant to cost rise if events use impersonators with disclosure or not
E. Attendees will be attracted if real athletes will be used -> more attendees -> more revenue -> cost will be less. so weakens.

As per my reasoning the answer is B. Can some experts help.

Even i got this question wrong.Y no takers for this?

this is an alias of the below OG- question- IMO option E is not clearly written in this alias.
whats the source ?

A famous singer recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using another singer in a commercial to evoke the famous singer's well-known rendition of a certain song. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using imitators in commercials. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since famous singers' services cost more than those of their imitators.
The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Most people are unable to distinguish a famous singer's rendition of a song from a good imitator's rendition of the same song.
(B) Commercials using famous singers are usually more effective than commercials using imitators of famous singers.
(C) The original versions of some well-known songs are unavailable for use in commercials.
(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to mimic the physical mannerisms of famous singers.
(E) The advertising industry will use well-known renditions of songs in commercials.

OA-E

Source Vertias

I have seen many aliases for this question, And when i saw it in CAT i couldnt find the proper answer.And OA is absolutely out of scope for me.
Any experts Take?

Correct assumption should be

Advertising companies will continue to organize the events which includes football player to sign autographs and take pictures with attendees in future.

Op E needs modification.

Thanks for the PM on this one. Honestly I don't think there's a problem with E at all. The argument goes:

-Events attract attendees by giving them the chance to take photos with /get autographs from athletes
-They've been doing so by paying actors to play that role, but now a court ruling says they can only use the actual athletes themselves
-The real athletes are more expensive
THEREFORE, costs of these events will rise

Well, the costs will only rise if you actually pay for the expensive athletes. If you change directions entirely and abandon the autograph/photo situation in favor of some other promotion, you won't pay those athlete costs. So the argument clearly assumes that the events will continue with these promotions.

I'd argue that the best way to look at Assumption questions is to imagine subtracting the assumptions and treat it like a Weaken question. If the assumption were NOT true, could the argument still hold? And here, if we say that the events will DIScontinue this practice, then costs will not rise. The conclusion fails without choice E, so E is a correct choice - it's an assumption required by the conclusion.

bblast wrote:this is an alias of the below OG- question- IMO option E is not clearly written in this alias.
whats the source ?

A famous singer recently won a lawsuit against an advertising firm for using another singer in a commercial to evoke the famous singer's well-known rendition of a certain song. As a result of the lawsuit, advertising firms will stop using imitators in commercials. Therefore, advertising costs will rise, since famous singers' services cost more than those of their imitators.
The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Most people are unable to distinguish a famous singer's rendition of a song from a good imitator's rendition of the same song.
(B) Commercials using famous singers are usually more effective than commercials using imitators of famous singers.
(C) The original versions of some well-known songs are unavailable for use in commercials.
(D) Advertising firms will continue to use imitators to mimic the physical mannerisms of famous singers.
(E) The advertising industry will use well-known renditions of songs in commercials.

OA-E

Spot on! Definitely an alias of the above question that appeared twice in OG 11 & 12.

Chose B to alias question.