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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Fastfood king

Expert replies
by vscid » Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:36 pm
In January of last year, Fastfood King started using a new lowfat oil to cook its Fast Fries, instead of the less healthful corn oil that it had been using. Now Fastfood King is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt sales of Fast Fries. However, this claim is incorrect, since according to Fastfood King's own sales figures, Fastfood King sold 10 percent more Fast Fries last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Fastfood King's claim?

1]Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King's locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.
2]Fastfood King enjoys higher profit margins on its Soft Drinks than it does on Fast Fries.
3]Fastfood King's customers prefer the taste of Fast Fries cooked in corn oil to Fast Fries cooked in lowfat oil.
4]The number of customers that visited Fastfood King locations was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.
5]The year before last, Fastfood King experienced a 20 percent increase in Fast Fries sales over the previous year.
The GMAT is indeed adaptable. Whenever I answer RC, it proficiently 'adapts' itself to mark my 'right' answer 'wrong'.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by liferocks » Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:56 pm
I am left with option A by process of elimination.

B. irrelevant
C. weaken the argument by supporting fastfood king's statement
4. providing an alternate cause for increase in fast fry sales hence weakening the argument.
5. providing statistical data to show that yoy growth in sales profit has been reduced for fast fries hence weakening
can any one explaing if there is any flaw in the above reasoning.I am not fully satisfied with ans A.
Join the discussion

by mituag » Tue Apr 13, 2010 9:56 pm
I go with D.

1]Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King’s locations increased by less than 10 percent last year. Confused about this option..

2]Fastfood King enjoys higher profit margins on its Soft Drinks than it does on Fast Fries. - Irrelevant

3]Fastfood King’s customers prefer the taste of Fast Fries cooked in corn oil to Fast Fries cooked in lowfat oil. - Supports FastFood King's Claim, so eliminate...

4]The number of customers that visited Fastfood King locations was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before. - This supports the claim that FastFood sold 10% more fries compared to previous year...

5]The year before last, Fastfood King experienced a 20 percent increase in Fast Fries sales over the previous year. - Supports FastFood King's Claim, so eliminate...
Join the discussion

by aspirant2010 » Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:26 am
One more vote for D....kindly let me know the correct answer also......
Join the discussion

by paes » Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:36 am
I will go for D
Join the discussion

by neoreaves » Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:38 am
IMO A)

If sales increased by less than 10% and Fries increased by more than 10% then this was surely because low fat oil fries were preferred.

B) is irrelevant
C) weakens argument
D) weakens
E) weakens
Join the discussion

by Shawshank » Wed Apr 14, 2010 5:14 am
POE Rocks,,

IMO -- A
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shawshank Redemtion -- Hope is still alive ...
Join the discussion

by smar83 » Wed Apr 14, 2010 6:28 am
I will go with D.

Please see... that A looks appealing, but it says " all foods " and we are only concerned about Fries.

D looks more precise.

what is the OA ?
Join the discussion

by deepesh.gupta » Wed Apr 14, 2010 8:40 am
I would go with D.

A - it says the increase in fast fries was more than other foods which implies that low fat oil was preferred by customers and did not hurt the sales. Hence weakens the argument of Fast King
B - irrelevant
C - irrelevant
D - CORRECT - it says that there were 20% more customers which means the sales of fast fried should have also increase in the same proportion, i.e., 20%. But it did not happen and hurt the sales. Supports the claim of Fast King
E - The growth rates for different years can be different. We should have something from the same year to compare with
vscid wrote:In January of last year, Fastfood King started using a new lowfat oil to cook its Fast Fries, instead of the less healthful corn oil that it had been using. Now Fastfood King is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt sales of Fast Fries. However, this claim is incorrect, since according to Fastfood King's own sales figures, Fastfood King sold 10 percent more Fast Fries last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Fastfood King's claim?

1]Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King's locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.
2]Fastfood King enjoys higher profit margins on its Soft Drinks than it does on Fast Fries.
3]Fastfood King's customers prefer the taste of Fast Fries cooked in corn oil to Fast Fries cooked in lowfat oil.
4]The number of customers that visited Fastfood King locations was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.
5]The year before last, Fastfood King experienced a 20 percent increase in Fast Fries sales over the previous year.
Join the discussion

by meghash3 » Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:51 am
answer is a all the way, as all product sale incr by less than 10 %, strengthens that fries increased by more than 10 % and others by less than 10 %
Join the discussion

by smar83 » Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:03 am
Ok... putting end to the suspense...

I have seen this problem on the MGMAT exam and hence looked up for it on the MGMAT forums as the Original poster has not included the OA.

The correct answer is A.
Join the discussion

by paddle_sweep » Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:27 am
Could somebody explain as to what's wrong with "D"?
Join the discussion

by vscid » Sun Apr 18, 2010 5:32 am
paddle_sweep wrote:Could somebody explain as to what's wrong with "D"?
D actually weakens the conclusion instead of strengthening it. If 20% more people visited, and Fast Fry sales increased only by 10%, then the oil change has negatively impacted the sales.
The GMAT is indeed adaptable. Whenever I answer RC, it proficiently 'adapts' itself to mark my 'right' answer 'wrong'.
Join the discussion

by [email protected] » Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:02 am
Hi Experts,

Can you please highlight how E is incorrect? Isn't it supporting the argument by showing that there was a 20% increase in sales as compared to the last year. I hope here I am understanding this correctly. If current year is 2016, previous year when the sales went low as per arg is 2015 and the year before that is 2014 or are we comparing 2014 and 2013. Please clarify?
Join the discussion