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
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

MainLine Airways

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:44 pm
Thanked: 8 times
by sandy217 » Mon May 23, 2011 3:01 am
Mainline Airways was bought by its employees six years ago. Three years ago, Mainline hired QualiCo Advertising Agency to handle its promotions and advertising division. Today Mainline's profits are over 20 percent higher than they were five years ago and 10 percent higher than they were three years ago. Employee ownership and a good advertising agency have combined to make Mainline more profitable.
Which of the following best describes the weak point in the argument above?
(A) It fails to establish a causal connection between the change in ownership at Mainline Airways and the hiring of QualiCo, on the one hand, and the rise in Mainline's profits, on the other.
(B) It presents no evidence showing that employee-owned airlines are any more profitable than other airlines.
(C) It assumes that the profits of Mainline Airways will continue to rise.
(D) It gives no exact figures for the current profits of Mainline Airways.
(E) It fails to explain how the profits of Mainline Airways are calculated.

OA A
My reasoning for B ,
Conclusion: employee owned company is more profitable because of Employee ownership and advertising agency.
It makes a comparison here and doesn't provide any data of other airlines.I can say market is doing better and can be the reason for better performance.
Am i missing something?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 7:39 pmFollowed by: 2 members
Location: Singapore
Thanked: 6 times

by abhi0697 » Mon May 23, 2011 4:03 am
A: change of ownership and hiring of QualiCo has not been shown any connection with higher profit company is making year after year. But argument concludes with employee ownership and good advertising is making Mainline profitable. But where is the reason behind this.

B: this argument is not only about the employee ownership making the company profitable but also about the hiring of QualiCo. Together they make the company profitable.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:44 pm
Thanked: 8 times

by sandy217 » Mon May 23, 2011 4:09 am
abhi0697 wrote:A: change of ownership and hiring of QualiCo has not been shown any connection with higher profit company is making year after year. But argument concludes with employee ownership and good advertising is making Mainline profitable. But where is the reason behind this.

B: this argument is not only about the employee ownership making the company profitable but also about the hiring of QualiCo. Together they make the company profitable.
Thanks Abhi,

I dont negate your explanation of A. But i think B is still better than A.

IMO "employee owned company" refers to the company as such( it qualify the new company after employee ownership , which includes QualiCo).

Any comments?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:38 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 31 times
GMAT Score:730

by rohu27 » Mon May 23, 2011 4:43 am
why do you need ecvidence abt how employee owned companeis work in general? i.e better than or worse than previous.
this may just as well be a one off case.
maybe the general trend is MOSTLY(assume 90%) employee owned airlines do no tfare better.our company may well fall into the 10% category.

sandy217 wrote:
abhi0697 wrote:A: change of ownership and hiring of QualiCo has not been shown any connection with higher profit company is making year after year. But argument concludes with employee ownership and good advertising is making Mainline profitable. But where is the reason behind this.

B: this argument is not only about the employee ownership making the company profitable but also about the hiring of QualiCo. Together they make the company profitable.
Thanks Abhi,

I dont negate your explanation of A. But i think B is still better than A.

IMO "employee owned company" refers to the company as such( it qualify the new company after employee ownership , which includes QualiCo).

Any comments?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:36 amFollowed by: 2 members
Location: gurgaon
Thanked: 8 times

by itsmebharat » Thu May 26, 2011 2:30 am
I don't feel that A is the right answer, but after ruling out all other option, A is the best available option left.

employees bought MA in 2000, in 2003 MA hired agency to handle its promotions and ads
2006, MA profit is 20 % higher than in 2001 and 10 % higher in 2003

employee and agnecy helped MA to become profitable

Which of the following best describes the weak point in the argument above?

(A) It fails to establish a causal connection between the change in ownership at Mainline Airways and the hiring of QualiCo, on the one hand, and the rise in Mainline's profits, on the other.

(B) It presents no evidence showing that employee-owned airlines are any more profitable than other airlines.
first there is comparison with other airways which is irrelevant , secondly, it says any more profitable, the argument is only concerned with the 6 years when the company was profitable.

(C) It assumes that the profits of Mainline Airways will continue to rise.
irreleavant as talks about future
(D) It gives no exact figures for the current profits of Mainline Airways.
figures are given but it will not help to weaken the argument
(E) It fails to explain how the profits of Mainline Airways are calculated.
irrelevant
I am not an Expert, please feel free to suggest if there is an error.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1