diebeatsthegmat wrote: hi guys, this CR was discussed before and i cant believe the OA because the Oa is D instead of C. according to what i understood.
W banned importing orange from V in order to raise its orange's price and as the result its orange's price increased
conclusion : W's ban got successful.
and we need to weaken that conclusion.
and D states " the rise in prace leads to a decline in sale of those oranges"
according to me it doesnt deal with the conclusion. ok, the sale declines then what?

The problem lies in the identification of the topic, fact & conclusion.
The main topic here is : Good business for orange farmers in W with a ban on V.
The fact is : the prices have risen.
The conclusion is : The ban was successful.

So the assumption here is that since the prices have risen, the ban achieved the objective - good business.

Since : A, B & C are out of scope. (C as well since we don't care what happened with V's crops)
E is tricky but incorrect since they never mentioned quality.
best answer is D

IMO D

This option directly hurts the conclusion "Ban was a success". If it were to be a success then sales would have increased.


Thanks
Gaumzi

gsinghal wrote:If it were to be a success then sales would have increased.

isnt that an assumption ???

rohit_gmat wrote:

diebeatsthegmat wrote: hi guys, this CR was discussed before and i cant believe the OA because the Oa is D instead of C. according to what i understood.
W banned importing orange from V in order to raise its orange's price and as the result its orange's price increased
conclusion : W's ban got successful.
and we need to weaken that conclusion.
and D states " the rise in prace leads to a decline in sale of those oranges"
according to me it doesnt deal with the conclusion. ok, the sale declines then what?

The problem lies in the identification of the topic, fact & conclusion.
The main topic here is : Good business for orange farmers in W with a ban on V.
The fact is : the prices have risen.
The conclusion is : The ban was successful.

So the assumption here is that since the prices have risen, the ban achieved the objective - good business.



Since : A, B & C are out of scope. (C as well since we don't care what happened with V's crops)
E is tricky but incorrect since they never mentioned quality.
best answer is D

how come C out of scope. it can weaken the conclusion. it means its because the orange supply in V decreased and this
did indead lead to the price in W increased, it doesnt mean that W's ban got successful
i still dont understand

diebeatsthegmat wrote:Country W has banned importation of oranges from Country V in order to protect Country W's orange growers. Since orange prices in Country W have risen since this ban was instituted, the ban is considered a success.

Which of the following, if true, would cast doubt on the conclusion above?


1. The demand for oranges in Country V has risen.

2. The demand for oranges in Country W has decreased.

3. A freeze in Country V damaged large portions of the orange crop.

4. The rise in Country W's orange prices will lead to a decline in sales of those oranges.

5. Orange growers no longer need to spend advertising money to convince consumers Country W produces superior oranges to Country V.

hi guys, this CR was discussed before and i cant believe the OA because the Oa is D instead of C. according to what i understood.
W banned importing orange from V in order to raise its orange's price and as the result its orange's price increased
conclusion : W's ban got successful.
and we need to weaken that conclusion.
and D states " the rise in prace leads to a decline in sale of those oranges"
according to me it doesnt deal with the conclusion. ok, the sale declines then what?

Dude,

This is seriously a very poorly reasoned CR question. What's the source of this question? I would advise you not to struggle with this one and just plainly ignore it..

About the answer..Well, all options seem bad because the argument is poor. However, if God forbid, such a question were to come in the GMAT, the answer would have to be D..

Look at the argument in this way..Maybe it will help..

Why the ban on country V's oranges? Presumably so that the people in country W will be forced to buy oranges produced in country W, thereby increasing the sales and consequently the profit. Thus, the key measurement criterion for evaluating whether the ban was successful would be the additional revenue or profit that orange growers of Country W are earning after the ban has been enforced.

The argument illogically tries to equate a rise in prices with the success of the ban. It is very likely that if the rise in prices is accompanied by a corresponding decrease in net sales, the revenues of orange growers of country W would still be the same and hence the ban cannot be called successful.

Now look at all the options. D hits the correct reason that a rise in prices will lead to a decline in sales which in turn means that orange growers will not earn more after the ban which further implies that the ban is not successful. Thus the conclusion is weakened...

Having said that, I reiterate that this is a very poor question and I wouldn't pay much attention to it if I got this one wrong..

Hope this helps...

Cheers!!

Agree with scorpionz. What's the source of this question?

for me...E seems to be best
It says that Now(says no longer) needs ad that means people of W thinks their country's organe is better than V'S and they buy it so price have gone up because of that not because of BAN
even if there were no ban,people may not have bought it...
the reason the rise in price is "good image" not ban....

I have used the concept of cause/effect -

Cause - ban to protect country's W orange growers
Effect - Increase in price

Conclusion - Ban was the success

Assumption

1. The ban should benefit the orange grower of the country W.
2. There is no other reason for rise in price
3. Increase of price should have no impact on the sales of grower

Choice 4 weakens it. This is my way of solving this CR. However, Scorpionz did a good job of explaining it.