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.

LSAT Q . Market Share

Expert replies
by sachindia » Wed Aug 01, 2012 10:55 pm
Rumored declines in automobile-industry revenues
are exaggerated. It is true that automobile
manufacturers' share of the industry's revenues fell
from 65 percent two years ago to 50 percent today,
but over the same period suppliers of automobile
parts had their share increase from 15 percent to 20
percent and service companies (for example,
distributors, dealers, and repairers) had their share
increase from 20 percent to 30 percent.
Which one of the following best indicates why the
statistics given above provide by themselves no
evidence for the conclusion they are intended to
support?
(A) The possibility is left open that the statistics
for manufacturers' share of revenues come
from a different source than the other
statistics.
(B) No matter what changes the automobile
industry's overall revenues undergo, the
total of all shares of these revenues must be
100 percent.
(C) No explanation is given for why the revenue
shares of different sectors of the industry
changed.
(D) Manufacturers and parts companies depend for
their revenue on dealers' success in selling
cars.
(E) Revenues are an important factor but are not
the only factor in determining profits.



Q1) what type of Question is this? What is the author asking us to do.

Please help with this one.
Regards,
Sach
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Kasia@EconomistGMAT » Wed Aug 01, 2012 11:14 pm
This is a Conclusion Weakening question. You need to find an answer choice which, if true, weakens the argument (shows that the presented data does not support the conclusion).
Kasia
Senior Instructor
Master GMAT - the #1 rated GMAT course

"¢ If you found my post helpful, please click the "thank" button and/or follow me.

"¢ Take a 7 day free trial and find out why Economist GMAT is the highest rated GMAT course - https://gmat.economist.com/

"¢ Read GMAT Economist reviews - https://reviews.beatthegmat.com/economis ... mat-course
Join the discussion

by sachindia » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:22 am
Thanks Kasia, So what would be the answer here?
Regards,
Sach
Join the discussion

by hoji » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:23 am
sachindia wrote:Thanks Kasia, So what would be the answer here?
IMO D,
the reason:
the premise says that industry's share declined, but industry's other two sectors' share increased
from this the argument states that decline in industry's revenue is not that bad.

Now imagine that whole industry is 100% and it has 10 sectors. The two sectors' increase in share does not necessarily mean that whole industry's share increased: it may be that other sectors may account for the balance(example: other 8s' share decreased by the amount)

so what matters most is the whole industry's change, not its individual sectors(except all sectors in the industry taken together)
I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of a man to elevate his life by conscious endeavor.
Henry David Thoreau.

Sleep GMAT, eat GMAT, beat GMAT!
______________________________
Quant ----> 51
Verbal----> 44+
GMAT ----> 750+
Join the discussion