CR - Infer conclusion

@spartacus1412

Please provide your reasoning

spartacus1412 wrote:B

the argument states that 2 conditions are necessary for merger to b successful.
1. operating efficiency should increase.
2. majority of employees of both the firm should support the decision.

If any of the above stated reasons fail, the merger is likely to be unsuccessful.

the argument further states that "require laying-off a large number of both Graycorp and Magco employees causing most employees to be unlikely to support a merger attempt."

This suggests that the employees will not support the merger attempt. Hence, condition 2 fails.


Conclusion: The merger would fail.

The author of this passage asserts two premises. First, the author claims that a successful merger can only occur if the merger makes operations more efficient and the employees of both merging companies need to cooperate. Second, the author asserts that the two companies can only become more efficient through layoffs that would compromise the willingness of employees to cooperate.

We're asked to draw a conclusion from these premises. The two requirements for a successful merge cannot be achieved by Graycorp and Magco because a merge would cause laying-off employees, causing most (the majority) of these employees to be unlikely to support the merge. Employee support is necessary for a successful merge. Therefore, we can conclude that Graycorp's acquisition of Magco won't be successful.Correct choice B restates the inference that Graycorp's merger with Magco wouldn't succeed.

Choice A is too extreme based upon the information provided in the argument. According to the passage, a successful acquisition requires the support of a majority of employees, not all employees.

The statement in choice C is incorrect because we know nothing about these companies' abilities to achieve efficiency; perhaps a merger between Magco and another company would result in an even greater increase in efficiency.

Choice D is too extreme; Magco might well suffer some negative consequence from a well-supported merger (perhaps some of its longtime employees might be fired).

Choice E can't be concluded either, because we don't know if Magco's employees would approve of the merger if the layoffs are to take place. Even in the absence of these layoffs, nothing can be known about the employees of one of the two companies discussed in the argument.

Choice B is correct.

karthikpandian19 wrote:For two companies to merge successfully, the merger must increase the efficiency of the operations of both companies, and it must receive support from a majority of both company's employees. Both Graycorp and Magco would effectively streamline their businesses by merging, but doing so would require laying-off a large number of both Graycorp and Magco employees, causing most employees to be unlikely to support a merger attempt.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following conclusions?


(A) For a corporation to merge with Magco successfully, all of Magco's employees would need to cooperate with the merger.

(B) An attempt by Graycorp to merge with Magco is very unlikely to be successful.

(C) Any merger between Graycorp and Magco would result in increases in efficiency for both companies that would be unachievable otherwise.

(D) As long as both merging companies effectively streamline their operations, Magco would suffer no negative consequences from the acquisition.

(E) Most of Magco's employees would be likely to cooperate with the merger if both companies agreed to it.