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

Redeem

A new company can offer stocks in an initial public offering

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

A new company can offer stocks in an initial public offering

by BTGmoderatorDC » Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:30 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

A new company can offer stocks in an initial public offering (IPO) before the company has proven itself capable of generating long-term profits for its stockholders. Historically, if a compasny has seemed likely to generate profits, the stock price in the IPO has risen; if the company seemed less likely to generate profits, the stock price in the IPO has fallen. Today business analysts announced that the Tenon Corporation has turned a profit in the financial quarter just completed. Therefore, stock prices for the Tenon Corporation's IPO, which is planned for next week, will rise.

The author's conclusion about Tenon Corporation is based on faulty reasoning because it

A. depends on the assumption that what has been true in the past will hold true in the future.
B. relies on a line of reasoning that is circular.
C. confuses cause with effect.
D. overlooks cases in which the counter-example is true.
E. rests on a faulty comparison.

OA A

Source: Princeton Review
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
Followed by:5 members

by deloitte247 » Fri Mar 08, 2019 10:17 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

OPTION A:- CORRECT
This is true. The authors conclusion is completely based on the assumption that what is true in the past will hold in the future. meaning that, because its been historically proven that if a company has seem likely to generate profits. The stock of the IPO has risen, if the company seems less likely to generate profits, the stock of the IPO has fallen. The author's conclusion relies solely on this assumption and therefore makes it faulty.

OPTION B:- INCORRECT
Circular in the sense that involving reasoning that uses the argument or proof a conclusion to be proved or one of its unproved consequences. The author's conclusion about the Tenon corporation isn't faulty based on the fact that its line of reasoning is circular because it has been proven and its consequences are well known.

OPTION C:- INCORRECT
The argument has no history of confusing cause with effect, so the author's conclusion isn't based on the faulty reasoning because it confused fact with effect.

OPTION D:- INCORRECT
The argument didn't provide a case to which the counter - example is true, so the author's conclusion can't be based on the fact that it overlooks the counter example because there was non to begin with.

OPTION E:- INCORRECT
The argument has a firm foundation based on its historical achievements which seems to be true, therefore the arguments isn't faulty and can't serve as a faulty ground to which a conclusion is drawn from.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1