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

Redeem

Break-up!

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:28 am
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:1 members

Break-up!

by bhumika.k.shah » Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:38 am
Since the break-up of the monopoly AT&T held on the telephone industry, the average price of long-distance phone calls has decreased by 15 percent. Therefore, if the virtual monopoly cable television maintains over the pay-television industry is broken up, the price for pay-television will also decrease by 15 percent.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
A.The price of pay television increased at approximately the same time that the price of long-distance calls decreased.
B.When an established monopoly exists in an industry, the price of that industry's product tends to increase.
C.The number of long-distance calls made has dramatically increased in recent years, while the number of people subscribing to pay television has remained the same.
D.If the monopoly over the pay television industry continues, the price for pay television will increase significantly.
E.The price of pay television is controlled by economic and sociological forces different from those that control the price of long-distance phone calls.

Reasoning required please
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:16 am
Since the break-up of the monopoly AT&T held on the telephone industry, the average price of long-distance phone calls has decreased by 15 percent. Therefore, if the virtual monopoly cable television maintains over the pay-television industry is broken up, the price for pay-television will also decrease by 15 percent.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?

Argument can be paraphrased as under :

Break up of monopoly of AT & T on telephone industry
Price of calls decreased by 15%

Therefore if : - Break up of monopoly of Cable TV on pay-tv industry
Price of pay-tv will decrease by 15$

Here comparison is made between two items that are essentially different. The answer choice that restates this will help weaken the argument.

A.The price of pay television increased at approximately the same time that the price of long-distance calls decreased.
INCORRECT : out of scope

B.When an established monopoly exists in an industry, the price of that industry's product tends to increase.
INCORRECT : out of scope.. issue is not about existence of monopoly.... issue is about break up of monopoly

C.The number of long-distance calls made has dramatically increased in recent years, while the number of people subscribing to pay television has remained the same.
INCORRECT : number v/s percentage dispute

D.If the monopoly over the pay television industry continues, the price for pay television will increase significantly.
INCORRECT : helps to strengthen the argument by stating that if the cause (monopoly) occurs then effect (increase in price of pay tv) will also occur

E.The price of pay television is controlled by economic and sociological forces different from those that control the price of long-distance phone calls.
CORRECT : This shows that comparison is made between items that are essentially different

Hope this helps : )
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:13 pm
Location: Greater NYC
Thanked: 14 times

by prinit » Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:57 am
This is really a good one. My Pick is E.

A - extra info but out of scope.
B & D - are out , Actually they suggests why the price would go up but dont establish any relations..
C. Tempting, but the number of calls made compared with the number of people subscribing..but calls made went up in recent years and could be due to avg price dropped. But the number of TV subscribers are same...so it does not weaken the conclusion at all.
E - fits the Bill. telephone industry and pay-television industry are two different industries and controlled by two different entities. So what works for A may not work for B. actually weakens.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: Hyderabad
Thanked: 12 times

by vijay_venky » Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:17 pm
I had a confusion between C and E

I thought that "the decrease in the price of the long distance call could be because of the increase in the number of calls which is not the case with the pay-television industry" and eventually ended up selecting C.

Is there any way to avoid such flawed reasoning? Please help.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Thu Jan 28, 2010 9:30 pm
vijay_venky wrote:I had a confusion between C and E

I thought that "the decrease in the price of the long distance call could be because of the increase in the number of calls which is not the case with the pay-television industry" and eventually ended up selecting C.

Is there any way to avoid such flawed reasoning? Please help.
thats y in GMAT its necessary to read all options....
in the abscence of E , C wud have been the ans.
opton C is a kind of assumption , which is toooooooo.......far from the argument , nothing about numbers is discussed in stimulus....
these kind of tempting answers will always there to pull one down...
to avoid we must be aware of the scope of stimulus
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:09 am
komal wrote: C.The number of long-distance calls made has dramatically increased in recent years, while the number of people subscribing to pay television has remained the same.
INCORRECT : number v/s percentage dispute
Wonderful Reasoning Komal!!!
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1275
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: Arabian Sea
Thanked: 125 times
Followed by:2 members

by ajith » Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:24 am
bhumika.k.shah wrote:Since the break-up of the monopoly AT&T held on the telephone industry, the average price of long-distance phone calls has decreased by 15 percent. Therefore, if the virtual monopoly cable television maintains over the pay-television industry is broken up, the price for pay-television will also decrease by 15 percent.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
A.The price of pay television increased at approximately the same time that the price of long-distance calls decreased.
B.When an established monopoly exists in an industry, the price of that industry's product tends to increase.
C.The number of long-distance calls made has dramatically increased in recent years, while the number of people subscribing to pay television has remained the same.
D.If the monopoly over the pay television industry continues, the price for pay television will increase significantly.
E.The price of pay television is controlled by economic and sociological forces different from those that control the price of long-distance phone calls.

Reasoning required please
A - It does not weaken the conclusion since the time frame for the implementation is different
B - Supports the conclusion
C - Cannot weaken the argument since post implementation scenario for phone is compared with pre implementation scenario for TV
D - Supports the conclusion
E - Weakens the argument since it attacks the validity of the comparison

E for me
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 10:43 pm
I must admit that E seems to be the answer. What's OA?
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1