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

Redeem

Waterfront Properties

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:08 pm

Waterfront Properties

by bmehra » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:17 am
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?
  • 1. People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
    2. Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
    3. Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
    4. Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
    5. Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:29 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 26 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:700

by asamaverick » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:48 am
I will go with B

The argument mentions that much of the waterfront was left to industry & commerce. It does say that today people are willing to pay for beach front properties, but does not say if people are willing to pay for the waterfront properties developed in industrial or commercial districts. B reflects this and hence supports the claim that builders will be able to make profits by building properties on these waterfronts. They key here is to understand that for builders to be profitable there should be buyers interested in buying the properties.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:40 am
one more for B what is oa?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:59 am
Thanked: 4 times

by missionGMAT007 » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:56 am
I will go with C

The requirements for the developer to make large profit are
1. People should buy the newly constructed residential buildings
2. urban waterfront lots should be available to buy for the developer.

If anything fails, the developer will not make profit.
C confirms 2.

Problem with B, though i am not sure, is --
nowhere in the stimulus it is mentioned that waterfront properties are traditionally industrial or commercial districts.

OA please.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:18 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by ansumania » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:45 pm
IMO D.......it will make profit for them....

OA pl.
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:08 pm

by bmehra » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:50 pm
OA is B
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:39 am
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

by pnk » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:45 am
To strengthen: developer sud invest in urban waterfront to make profits

1. People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries; (people hv more money bt whether they will invest in urban waterfront so that developer will make large profits...not known....out)

2. Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts. (possible...homeowners will invest in industrial/commercial areas...may invest in coastal waterfronts. Coastal waterfronts can be part of urban waterfronts) - IMO

3. Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase. (many available...buyers may not pay higher price....developers may not be able to make larger profits)

4. Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives (can be out of scope...agru abt coastal waterfronts not cities; additionally even if developers invest in waterfronts for tax incentives, we do not know whether enough buyers will be there...if no...then developers can't make large profits)

5. Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront (weaken the conclusion)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:46 am
Thanked: 2 times

by martin.jonson007 » Sat Jun 19, 2010 5:16 am
B and D are only contender...!

By choosing B over D, You are making assumption that large sums will be greater than tax incentives

I believe this assumtion is not small enough to be taken for granted...!

we need some sort of data to make such assumption... no matter our common sense says tax incentive can not be grater than huge sums , which people are willing to pay for such properties... well.. there may be some remote places where people might not be willing to pay that much as incentive could be... !
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:09 pm
in "strengthen" and "weaken" problems, the biggest difficulty is not straying away from the topics at hand -- you have to stay as close as possible to the content of the passage and its conclusion.

the conclusion of this passage is the following statement:
bmehra wrote:A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.
therefore, in order to support this claim, we need a statement that has to do with (a) PROFITS, (b) WATERFRONT LOTS (and the associated facts about waterfront lots), and (c) RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

1. People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
this statement has nothing to do with waterfront lots or residential buildings. it also has nothing directly to do with the profits of developers; it just states that people have more money to spend, not necessarily that they will actually spend more of it.
2. Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
this statement is perfect; it hits all three of the topics above, directly.
(a) profits --> this is covered by the "WILL be willing to spend LARGE SUMS" part
(b) waterfront lots --> this is where the "traditionally industrial or commercial districts" part comes in; the passage has characterized waterfront lots as exactly these sorts of districts
(c) residential buildings --> this answer choice specifically states "residential properties"
3. Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
this gives no evidence that purchasing these lots will be profitable, nor does it have anything to do with residential buildings.
4. Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
this gives no reason why the companies should build RESIDENTIAL buildings, which is actually the main conclusion of the passage.
5. Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
we don't care about anything other than the waterfront in this passage, so comparisons to any other regions are irrelevant.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:12 pm
martin.jonson007 wrote:B and D are only contender...!

By choosing B over D, You are making assumption that large sums will be greater than tax incentives

I believe this assumtion is not small enough to be taken for granted...!

we need some sort of data to make such assumption... no matter our common sense says tax incentive can not be grater than huge sums , which people are willing to pay for such properties... well.. there may be some remote places where people might not be willing to pay that much as incentive could be... !
what you're doing here is this: you are paying too much attention to details in the wrong places, and not enough attention to details in the right places.
specifically, details that are LOCATED IN THE CONCLUSION are much, much more important than details that are located elsewhere in the passage.

the conclusion of this passage deals only with RESIDENTIAL buildings; the conclusion, by stating that the developers should build residential buildings, requires some sort of evidence that residential buildings are better than other sorts of buildings. the only choice, of all five, that does this is the correct answer (b).

the tax incentives given in choice (d) are probably a good reason for developers to consider building something on these properties, but they give absolutely no reason why the developers should build residential buildings, rather than something else.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:54 am
Followed by:1 members

by CaptainM » Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:12 am
lunarpower wrote:in "strengthen" and "weaken" problems, the biggest difficulty is not straying away from the topics at hand -- you have to stay as close as possible to the content of the passage and its conclusion.



this statement is perfect; it hits all three of the topics above, directly.
(a) profits --> this is covered by the "WILL be willing to spend LARGE SUMS" part
(b) waterfront lots --> this is where the "traditionally industrial or commercial districts" part comes in; the passage has characterized waterfront lots as exactly these sorts of districts
(c) residential buildings --> this answer choice specifically states "residential properties"
quote]

Hi Ron,
gr8 explnation!!!

I could not understand 1 thing:
The passage says:
"Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front."
option B says:
2. Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.

is not option B just repeating what is there in the passage.
if yes then can I take away that repeating words from the passage(with a few synonyms) is a right kind of answer option for Strenghtening Qs.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 am
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:7 members

by GMATMadeEasy » Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:52 am
@lunarpower: E is talking about coastal region and states that property along the water front are cheaper than interior. Wont this lead /motivate customers to buy the property there ? hence supporting the conclusion to make more profit.

Could you explain the gap in my understaning .
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:34 am
CaptainM wrote:
lunarpower wrote:I could not understand 1 thing:
The passage says:
"Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front."
option B says:
2. Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.

is not option B just repeating what is there in the passage.
no, that part is adding a significant extra consideration -- namely, that people will pay a lot of money for beachfront homes in areas that were once industrial.
there is no indication in the current passage that the expensive beachfront homes are located on formerly industrial property, so that's a significant improvement upon the passage.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:37 am
GMATMadeEasy wrote:@lunarpower: E is talking about coastal region and states that property along the water front are cheaper than interior. Wont this lead /motivate customers to buy the property there ? hence supporting the conclusion to make more profit.
what you're doing here is trying, really hard, to make the answer choice strengthen the argument, because the question prompt says "strengthen". (this is not unlike the way people think in courtrooms -- the defense always thinks that the evidence supports the defense, while the prosecution always thinks that the *same* evidence supports the prosecution.)

you can't do that -- you have to evaluate whether a statement strengthens or weakens the argument FROM A NEUTRAL STARTING POINT; you should TRY TO FORGET WHETHER THE QUESTION SAID "STRENGTHEN" OR "WEAKEN" until AFTER you have evaluated which way the answer choices go.

this answer choice says that waterfront selling prices are low.
from a neutral standpoint, lower selling prices are clearly associated with lower profits.
so this answer choice goes the wrong way.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Top
User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:04 am

by sam117 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 5:43 pm
The question stem asks about a claim made about urban waterfront properties.

You say that "A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them." is the claim we are asked about.

In my opinion this is not a claim about urban waterfront properties but about developers who wish to make large profit. In my opinion the claim about urban waterfornt properties is "waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious" Am I wrong? Please help.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply