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.

Government standards

Expert replies
by EricKryk » Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:56 am
Three large companies and seven small companies currently manufacture a product with potential military applications. If the government regulates the industry, it will institute a single set of manufacturing specifications to which all ten companies will have to adhere. In this case, therefore, since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications, only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument relies?

(A) None of the three large companies will go out of business if the government does not regulate the manufacture of the product.

(B) It would cost more to convert the production lines of the small companies to a new set of manufacturing specifications than it would to convert the production lines of the large companies.

(C) Industry lobbyists will be unable to dissuade the government from regulating the industry.

(D) Assembly of the product produced according to government manufacturing specifications would be more complex than current assembly procedures.

(E) None of the seven small companies currently manufactures the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Patrick_GMATFix » Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:21 am
An assumption is an unstated proposition that must be true for the argument to be valid. In this case, the author claims that since the small companies would be unable to afford the conversion, new manufacturing specs would put them all out of business. Ask yourself "does this have to be true? why not?" Some possible ways to poke at the argument (to challenge its assumptions):

1) would all 7 small companies have to convert? what if one or more is already matching the new specs?
2) would all 7 companies have to close shop? maybe they can manufacture something else instead and stay in business.
3) could the govt (or some other actor) provide financial assistance? if so the companies may not have to close shop.
4) could small companies pool their resources (eg: a merger) and stay in business?

The argument makes assumptions about each of these possibilities. The full solution below is taken from the GMATFix App.

Image

-Patrick
  • Ask me about tutoring.
Join the discussion

by Abhishek009 » Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:14 am
EricKryk wrote:Three large companies and seven small companies currently manufacture a product with potential military applications. If the government regulates the industry, it will institute a single set of manufacturing specifications to which all ten companies will have to adhere. In this case, therefore, since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications, only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.
10 companies ( 7 small companies and 3 large companies) involved in manufacture of Military products.

Govt Introduces regulatory measures for all the companies - Small companies cant afford it and only the large companies will remain in Business.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument relies?

(A) None of the three large companies will go out of business if the government does not regulate the manufacture of the product.

Might be true .

(B) It would cost more to convert the production lines of the small companies to a new set of manufacturing specifications than it would to convert the production lines of the large companies.

Might be true , apart from cost there might be other problems as well like technological knowhow , Labor issues etc...- Still we can Hold it for further evaluation.

(C) Industry lobbyists will be unable to dissuade the government from regulating the industry.

Irrelevant and out of scope.

(D) Assembly of the product produced according to government manufacturing specifications would be more complex than current assembly procedures.

Irrelevant and out of scope.

(E) None of the seven small companies currently manufactures the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.

Definitely true.

If the smaller companies are involved in production fo goods according to Government regulations it will not be a problem for them in near future coz they are already producing the goods as per requirements...


Hence Between (B) and (E) I choose E...
Abhishek
Join the discussion

by camitava » Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:56 am
I also agree with what Abhishek explained. I would also like to go with option E.
Correct me If I am wrong


Regards,

Amitava
Join the discussion

by GMATGuruNY » Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:29 am
EricKryk wrote:Three large companies and seven small companies currently manufacture a product with potential military applications. If the government regulates the industry, it will institute a single set of manufacturing specifications to which all ten companies will have to adhere. In this case, therefore, since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications, only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument relies?

(A) None of the three large companies will go out of business if the government does not regulate the manufacture of the product.

(B) It would cost more to convert the production lines of the small companies to a new set of manufacturing specifications than it would to convert the production lines of the large companies.

(C) Industry lobbyists will be unable to dissuade the government from regulating the industry.

(D) Assembly of the product produced according to government manufacturing specifications would be more complex than current assembly procedures.

(E) None of the seven small companies currently manufactures the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.
Premise: None of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications.
Conclusion: Only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.

Apply the NEGATION test.
The correct assumption is WHAT MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to be valid.
Thus, when the correct answer choice is NEGATED, the conclusion will be INVALIDATED.
Note the following:
The opposite of none is SOME.

Answer choice E, negated:
SOME of the seven small companies currently manufacture the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.
The negation of E indicates that at least SOME of the seven small companies will be able to continue to manufacture the product, invalidating the conclusion that only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.
Thus, E is the correct assumption: WHAT MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to be valid.

The correct answer is E.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Join the discussion