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.

local theme park

Expert replies
by himu » Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:23 pm
A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the number of attendants at the park's entrance gates, claiming the new attendants will alleviate line congestion. The manager reasons that, since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park, and the increased revenue will offset the cost of the extra attendants.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the park manager's reasoning is flawed?

People who leave the current long lines at the entrance already reduce wait times to some degree.

The lines at attractions inside the park already make the average wait times inside considerably longer than those at the entrance.

A majority of people who visit the park have season passes, allowing them to bypass the entrance.

Many visitors opposing the plan have indicated that they prefer congestion at the entrance to potential overcrowding inside the park.

Though the number of attendants will double under the manager's plan, the number of visitors might only increase by 25 percent.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by anuprajan5 » Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:35 pm
Answer is D
Regards
Anup

The only lines that matter - are the ones you make!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk4sZcG ... ata_player
Join the discussion

by himu » Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:00 am
My Ans is same as yours .
But the correct ans is


Correct Answer: B

The manager's reasoning assumes that the marginal disincentive to visiting the park is the length of lines at the entrance. Choice B provides evidence that this assumption is in error, and is therefore the best answer. Choice A does not undermine the manager's view that wait times at the park's entrance are, to some people, a disincentive to visit the park. Thus choice A is incorrect. Choice C is inappropriate since the argument is consistent with a minority of people waiting in line at the entrance to visit the park. Choice D is inappropriate since many people preferring congestion at the entrance is not inconsistent with many people preferring reduced wait times. Choice E does not give enough information to determine whether revenue will offset the costs of attendants, and does not cast doubt upon the manager's reasoning since an increase of 25 percent may well more than offset the cost of doubling the entrance staff.
Join the discussion