Critical Reasoning

Let me share my level of understanding on this one:

Argument says that fund raisers succeeded in getting 80% donations but this success rate does not mean they are doing good job as most of the donation has come from people who has already donated in the past......in fact a good fund raiser is one .....who constantly seeks to increase the donor base by getting donation from people who have not donated previously....hence this shows insufficient canvassing effort

Now my understanding of the options here:


Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.

Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?

A. Smithtown University's fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people. -->by POE i chose this one...however i want a reason to understand why this is the wrong/correct option here.....I am not able to reason out this one........B. This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university's fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before. -->weaken the argument as the avg donation from people who never donated is higher than the ones who donated in the past...so out
C. This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university's fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors. -->makes no sense in context with the argument...it is irrelavant....i mean getting donation from people who donated in past and withoug making any contact with them.....so outD. The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before. -->weakens the argument as most of the donations come from people who never donated in the past...so out
E. More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University's fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university-->weaken the argument for same reasons as given for D so out

Anyone??

Have you read the many previous posts about this question?

kevincanspain wrote:Have you read the many previous posts about this question?

I read the explanation posted by Ian Stewart, private GMAT tutor:

But the question says that "fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted." The 80% only includes the donations the fundraisers acquired themselves; the donations mentioned in C are not, as I understand the question, included in the 80%.

The 80% is 'unusually high', according to the question. The argument is that the fundraisers concentrated more heavily on past donors, who are much more likely to donate, than they should have. A says that the fundraisers had only average success when they sought contributions from people who had never donated. Already this suggests that the fundraisers are unexceptional. But, more importantly, if they only had average success with those who had never donated, how could they possibly have achieved their 'unusually high' 80%? This only seems possible if they focused mostly on past donors, as the argument

How does option A says what is marked in red in the above statements.....because according to option A it says that fund raisers successful in contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as ones who donate before...then how come one can deduce that fund raisers only had average success when they sought money from people who never donated.....somehow i am not able to deduce the statement marked in red by using option A....

Please advise