Critical Reasoning

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.

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.

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...

One more vote for D....kindly let me know the correct answer also......

I will go for D

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

POE Rocks,,

IMO -- A

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 ?

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.

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 %

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.

Could somebody explain as to what's wrong with "D"?

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.

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?