Critical Reasoning

Sports consultant: The Maryvale Monsters should proceed with their plan to build a new, larger stadium. This past season, all of the general admission seats in the current stadium were sold out for every game, as were the more expensive luxury suites. The new stadium would contain 35% more general admission seats. Although revenue generated by these additional general admission seats would not justify their expense, the stadium would also contain twice as many luxury suites, the boost in revenue from which would more than offset all costs of the new stadium.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most significantly weaken the conclusion of the sports consultant's argument?


(A) Games at the new stadium would not be sold out unless ticket prices were lower, on average, than they are at the current stadium.

(B) The new, larger stadium would require the Maryvale Monsters to pay significantly higher maintenance costs and property taxes each year.

(C) All local residents who are interested in attending Maryvale Monsters games already do so.

(D) For many sports teams, new stadiums do not increase attendance and do not lead to additional revenue.

(E) Demographic research indicates that individuals who purchase luxury suites at the current stadium would instead purchase general admission seats if they were available

SC: Build a new larger stadium. Why ? So far all the seats in the existing stadium were sold out including the luxury suites. New stadium will have 35% more seats for general audience and twice as many luxury suites - revenue would offset all costs

Weaken: Some flaw in the plan would do it.

A - Irrelevant
B - Expense mentioned by sports consultant may include the maintenance and tax so this is not a weakner
C - Irrelevant.
D - It is said for many so ours might be an exception and can go otherwise
E - Weakens - if luxury suites are filled because of non availability of general seats then increase of 35% reduce the existing luxury suite audience and the plan is expecting on luxury suite revenues to recoup the costs

IMO E.

OA is E

I am not able to decide b/w A & E.

Conclusion s "The Maryvale Monsters should proceed with their plan to build a new, larger stadium"
Premises s 1) More Seats more sale so more profit
2) Boost in revenue from luxury suites is more then from admission seats.

A) If tickets are sold at lower prices then they will not be able to recover the money ...
B) In this we have to assume that the number of buyers will remain the same because if no of buyers are more then all the seats will be sold.

A is kind of repeating of the sentence - In the argument it says the revenue generated with the general admissions is not enough. In A, it combines general and luxury and makes as an average and then implies the cost cannot be retained. The effect is not clear from whether from general or luxury.


In E, this is explained clear cut manner, that it is only becoz of luxury seats

akashkumar1987 wrote:I am not able to decide b/w A & E.

Conclusion s "The Maryvale Monsters should proceed with their plan to build a new, larger stadium"
Premises s 1) More Seats more sale so more profit
2) Boost in revenue from luxury suites is more then from admission seats.

A) If tickets are sold at lower prices then they will not be able to recover the money ...
B) In this we have to assume that the number of buyers will remain the same because if no of buyers are more then all the seats will be sold.

here we need to weaken the conclusion that the revenue will be generated from luxury suits which will help the company overcome all the other expenses..

hence clearly c dominates in all the options..

A cannot be the answer because it does not explain why the increased number of the LUXURY SUITS will fail to do the needy to the company..

(C) All local residents who are interested in attending Maryvale Monsters games already do so.

C says tht all local residents already do so and doesnt specifically talk about the luxury seats or general seats. This is irrelevant to the conclusion

mohan514 wrote:here we need to weaken the conclusion that the revenue will be generated from luxury suits which will help the company overcome all the other expenses..

hence clearly c dominates in all the options..

A cannot be the answer because it does not explain why the increased number of the LUXURY SUITS will fail to do the needy to the company..

karthikpandian19 wrote:Sports consultant: The Maryvale Monsters should proceed with their plan to build a new, larger stadium. This past season, all of the general admission seats in the current stadium were sold out for every game, as were the more expensive luxury suites. The new stadium would contain 35% more general admission seats. Although revenue generated by these additional general admission seats would not justify their expense, the stadium would also contain twice as many luxury suites, the boost in revenue from which would more than offset all costs of the new stadium.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most significantly weaken the conclusion of the sports consultant's argument?


(A) Games at the new stadium would not be sold out unless ticket prices were lower, on average, than they are at the current stadium.

(B) The new, larger stadium would require the Maryvale Monsters to pay significantly higher maintenance costs and property taxes each year.

(C) All local residents who are interested in attending Maryvale Monsters games already do so.

(D) For many sports teams, new stadiums do not increase attendance and do not lead to additional revenue.

(E) Demographic research indicates that individuals who purchase luxury suites at the current stadium would instead purchase general admission seats if they were available

Always keep in mind to write a conclusion for Strengthen/Weaken.
The main point is to get profit, by increasing its capacity and increase the share of Luxury suites so that they get more money from Luxury suite.

A. It damages the conclusion by mentioning to reduce the price. In this case there is no need to construct large stadium.

B. Para doesnt mention anything about tax

C. Irrelevant and easily ruled out

D. The main idea is to increase the capacity and this choice is diverting the topic.

E. Correct choice : weakens the stmt

if do X then have Y

this type of argument is popular on OG books.

the assumption is simply that if we do X, we alway have Y.

the weakener attacks this assumption is E.

experts, pls,comment on my assumption. to find an weakener we have to first find the assumption. that is why we need to realize an assumption quickly

pls, comment on my thinking on assumption of this kind.