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

Redeem

Zoos and Aquariums

Expert replies
by chidcguy » Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:52 pm
In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called “pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo aquarium” of relatively modest scope.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?
(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.
(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by rajendran.kartik » Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:18 am
is it B.

What is the OA and the OE?
Join the discussion

by Vignesh.4384 » Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:14 am
I think it shold be B.

Only B explains the possible reason why vacationers are more than 1/2 the people visiting pre aqarium.
Join the discussion

by chidcguy » Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:55 am
Explain your OA guys. OA is B.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.
Join the discussion

by Paddy1234 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:08 am
Tough One: Lot oof assumptions to be made when arriving at the answer... This could only be possible by working backwards once you know the answer.... :cry:
Target 750
Join the discussion

by Paddy1234 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:09 am
Tough One: Lot oof assumptions to be made when arriving at the answer... This could only be possible by working backwards once you know the answer.... :cry:
Target 750
Join the discussion

by NSNguyen » Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:26 am
I will go with B,
Only B explain for the difference
Please share your idea and your reasoning :D
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org
Join the discussion

Re: Zoos and Aquariums

by nitin86 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:25 am
chidcguy wrote:In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called “pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo aquarium” of relatively modest scope.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?
(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.
(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
IMO - B

SO, the argument does not state the number of vacationers going to "pure aquariums" or to "zoos".

But, argument does says, the number of vacationers coming to "pure acquriums" form half of "pure acquariums" visitors, and a fourth for "zoos", which is only possible, when number of zoos are more than number of "pure acquariums"
[Assuming that vacationers may be going to both zoo and pure acquarium].

As we have to select best answer, we have to think in this direction to justify b
Join the discussion

Re: Zoos and Aquariums

by chidcguy » Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:56 am
nitin86 wrote: IMO - B

SO, the argument does not state the number of vacationers going to "pure aquariums" or to "zoos".

But, argument does says, the number of vacationers coming to "pure acquriums" form half of "pure acquariums" visitors, and a fourth for "zoos", which is only possible, when number of zoos are more than number of "pure acquariums"
[Assuming that vacationers may be going to both zoo and pure acquarium].

As we have to select best answer, we have to think in this direction to justify b
Are you saying that more vacationers are going to pure aquariums, because they are less in number? If thats what you are saying, thats quite an assumption for me to get to the answer.
Please do not post answer along with the Question you post/ask

Let people discuss the Questions with out seeing answers.
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:24 pm
I myself choosed A here and was stumed the second time...very nice question...very bad explanations...can somebody find out the faults wit A please...
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:32 pm
I just cannt understand the role of vaccationer in this whole argument as well, if vaccationers and locals are two entities required for the issue then A definetly has some merit otherwise choose whatever
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:33 pm
and it seems as somebody pointed B is possible only backwards....after knowing the answer kuddo to u man
Join the discussion

by fighting_cax » Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:13 pm
Is this logic correct:

Since most metropolitan areas already have zoos, (and few have aquariums), vacationers would rather go to aquariums than zoos -- thus accounting for the larger percentage of vacationers in aquariums than in zoos.
Join the discussion

by gkammaje » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:01 am
B - not sure if my reasoning is correct...
Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.

Most cities have a zoo - but no aquarium
Vacationer visiting a city which has a good aquarium is likely to visit the aquarium because he has already been to the zoo in his own city and would like to see something different...
Join the discussion

by keepsmilinyaar » Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:37 am
can we expect such a complex question on the GMAT?
Join the discussion