smackmartine wrote:IMO C

The logic behind the argument is that adding performance to satellite keep pushing the cost of these satellites because of some reason.We have to find a reason to support this cycle of increasing cost.
We can find the traditional approach to get to the right answer throughout many forums. However, if I were under time crunch , I would use process of elimination to get to the correct answer.

GMAT hates extreme ideas. Even if someone stumbles over such kind of convoluted arguments, he can leverage GMAT's take on extreme ideas.

A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable

smackmartine wrote:I know we must accept each answer in strengthening /weakening ?s, but I have mentioned that I did not apply any Traditional thinking , and I did say "If I were in a Time crunch"

mundasingh123 wrote:A recent spate of launching and operating mishaps with television satellites led to a corresponding surge in claims against companies underwriting satellite insurance. As a result, insurance premiums shot up, making satellites more expensive to launch and operate. This, in turn, has added to the pressure to squeeze more performance out of currently operating satellites.
Which of the following, if true, taken together with the information above, best supports the conclusion that the cost of television satellites will continue to increase?
A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable.