In New York there has been an explosion of public interest i

Question

In New York there has been an explosion of public interest in, and talent moving toward, internet startups over the last 5 years. The evidence of this explosion is that of the 100 or so internet startups currently active in the "New York Tech Meetup Group," 90 were founded over the course of the last 3 years.

The reasoning above assumes which one of the following?

(A)All of the 100 internet startups are commercially viable options.

(B)There were fewer than 90 internet startups that had been active 5 years ago and that ceased operations during the last 5 years.

(C)There has not been a corresponding increase in the number of startups devoted to other sectors such as fashion, pharmaceutical, and semiconductors.

(D)The percentage of college graduates going into computer related fields has increased over the past 5 years.

(E)The 90 most recently founded companies were all established as a result of creative energy on the part of young new talent

B

Rich.C@EMPOWERgmat.com · Answer

Hi shagalo,

This CR prompt is "thin", meaning that it does not offer us much information to work with. Thus, whatever information that we DO have will be pivotal to answering the question.

The Facts:
-100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group"
-90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years.

The Conclusion:
-In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years.

The Logic:
For the above scenario to be considered "an EXPLOSION" of interest, then there should be a comparable scenario that was NOT an explosion. The "margin" for defining an "explosion" in this prompt is 90 internet startups in 5 years (notice how the conclusion mentions 5 years while the evidence mentions 3 years; we have to focus on what the conclusion emphasizes).

The question asks us for an assumption based on the above logic. We don't have much to work with, so I'd be looking for anything that "fits" the above logic. The only answer that touches on the same ideas is answer B. None of the other answers is relevant to the prompt.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

Contact Rich at [email protected]

shagalo · Answer

Rich.C@EMPOWERgmat.com wrote:Hi shagalo, This CR prompt is "thin", meaning that it does not offer us much information to work with. Thus, whatever information that we DO have will be pivotal to answering the question. The Facts: -100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group" -90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years. The Conclusion: -In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years. The Logic: For the above scenario to be considered "an EXPLOSION" of interest, then there should be a comparable scenario that was NOT an explosion. The "margin" for defining an "explosion" in this prompt is 90 internet startups in 5 years (notice how the conclusion mentions 5 years while the evidence mentions 3 years; we have to focus on what the conclusion emphasizes). The question asks us for an assumption based on the above logic. We don't have much to work with, so I'd be looking for anything that "fits" the above logic. The only answer that touches on the same ideas is answer B. None of the other answers is relevant to the prompt. GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made, Rich thanks for taking the time to answer my question. But it is still not clear for me. how can i relate the answer to the passage. i know that there are 2 types of assumption questions: 1- fill the gap, 2- cause effect. this is not the cause effect type.so how can the correct answer fill that gap ?? Premise 1: 100 (or so) internet startups are currently active in the "NY Tech Meetup Group" Premise 2: 90 internet startups in the group were founded during the last 3 years. Conclusion :In NY, there has been an EXPLOSION of interest in internet startups in the last 5 years. i noticed that the premise mention 3 years and the conclusion mentioned 5 years but still i can figure out how to connect the answer to the gap.

Rich.C@EMPOWERgmat.com · Answer

Hi shagalo,

To use your terminology, the "gap" is in explaining what "an EXPLOSION" really means. If there's a RECENT EXPLOSION (in the last 5 years), then what was the situation BEFORE there was an explosion? The prompt defines "90 startups in 3 years" as an explosion, so I have to assume that "FEWER than 90" would NOT be an explosion. Furthermore, I'd assume that there were fewer than 90 before this latest explosion occurred.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

Contact Rich at [email protected]

David@VeritasPrep · Answer

This question is almost identical to another assumption question that is in the Veritas Critical Reasoning Book.

I have written a feature article about that question and how to approach it. Please read it and you will see what we are looking for from this assumption question.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2012/06/ ... -an-expert

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Choose how you want to prepare

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

In New York there has been an explosion of public interest i

GMAT/MBA Expert

GMAT/MBA Expert

Chicago Booth

GMAT Course Reviews

Admissions Consulting Reviews

FREE GMAT PREP RESOURCES

GMAT PREP DEAL TRACKER