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

Redeem

Weaken CR - Insect infestations.

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:44 am
Thanked: 5 times

Weaken CR - Insect infestations.

by annakool1009 » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:05 am
Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. By contrast, the price of soybeans has long remained stable. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly,
at least over the next several years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the plan’s chances for success?

A. The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.

B. Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.

C. In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.

D. Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

E. The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.

-----------------
I feel there are more than one possible answers to this question.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 9:25 am
Thanked: 21 times

by reachac » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:20 am
IMO B
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Thu Jul 31, 2008 8:06 am
@annakool1009

IMO:B

There will always be more than one answer for any Gmat question(in CR )....

Tats why the question stem uses the word most!!

We have to choose the answer that is most convincing..

thx
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:21 am
Thanked: 1 times

by gmattester » Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:31 am
Can someone explain this answer 'B'. According to me if 'B' is true then it will show their plan as success. How it weakens the plans chances of success.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:44 am
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

by loki.gmat » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:00 pm
now the main incentive for farmers here is high selling price of cotton & they expect that the selling price will be high in future.


A - cost of soyabeans - out of scope.

B - doesnot say anything about the status of selling price of cotton.hence incorrect.

C - well we need data about the present or future situation and not the past. hence incorrect.

D - it says that there will be hardly any customers that are willing to pay high prices for cotton. hence the profits of the farmers will decline substantially & that will lead to the failure of the plan.hence correct.

E - irrelevant.


Thanks!
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 am
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:2 members

by parallel_chase » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:59 pm
I think the answer is D.

In a weaken question one should always attack the conclusion, i.e. by growing cotton the farmers would be able to take advantage of the increasing prices and hence significantly increase their income.

If there would be few customers to pay, farmers will not be able to increase their income.

Hence D.


In weaken question, the correct answer will not only contradict the conclusion but also undermine the possibility of conclusion to be true, without affecting the premises or the facts in the argument.

Let me know if you still have any doubts.

Whats the OA?
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:41 pm
IMO:B

No doubt , we have to attack the conclusion in weakening questions.But we cannot just concentrate on the conclusion leaving the main argument behind.
HERE,
Stimulus argues:
Infestation lead to increase in the price of cotton but soyabeen prices are unaffected.

Thus farmers are planning to grow more cotton to take advantage of the situation.

Conclusion:Farmers are gonna take advantage of the situation by growing more cotton.

B says..,

The pesticides developed is effective on the infestation.

Thus when ,

Effective pestisides used=> reduction in infestation in cotton=>bring back the prices of cotton to their original price.

Thus this weakens the conclusion(decision) of farmers to grow more cotton for profit.

Now,D
D. Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

Agreed!! This does weaken d conclusion!!
But doesnt suffice the word "most" in the question stem.

suppose, there are total 100 consumers of cotton,

Few are willing to pay higher prices = 20 (supposition)

not willing to pay higher
(or those who will pay the normal price) = 80

Thus , even if only 20 are ready to pay higher price and 80 will pay the original price., still the total amount generated will be greater than the amount that wud have been generated with the normal amount.

So even if the profit is low, profit is there!!Thus farmers can still opt for growing more cotton!!Thus it doesnt weaken the conclusion to the extent required.

Thus, imo:B


Thanks.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 am
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:2 members

by parallel_chase » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:53 pm
raunekk wrote:IMO:B

No doubt , we have to attack the conclusion in weakening questions.But we cannot just concentrate on the conclusion leaving the main argument behind.
HERE,
Stimulus argues:
Infestation lead to increase in the price of cotton but soyabeen prices are unaffected.

Thus farmers are planning to grow more cotton to take advantage of the situation.

Conclusion:Farmers are gonna take advantage of the situation by growing more cotton.

B says..,

The pesticides developed is effective on the infestation.

Thus when ,

Effective pestisides used=> reduction in infestation in cotton=>bring back the prices of cotton to their original price.

Thus this weakens the conclusion(decision) of farmers to grow more cotton for profit.

Now,D
D. Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

Agreed!! This does weaken d conclusion!!
But doesnt suffice the word "most" in the question stem.

suppose, there are total 100 consumers of cotton,

Few are willing to pay higher prices = 20 (supposition)

not willing to pay higher
(or those who will pay the normal price) = 80

Thus , even if only 20 are ready to pay higher price and 80 will pay the original price., still the total amount generated will be greater than the amount that wud have been generated with the normal amount.

So even if the profit is low, profit is there!!Thus farmers can still opt for growing more cotton!!Thus it doesnt weaken the conclusion to the extent required.

Thus, imo:B


Thanks.
I totally agree with you. But even if there is profit, can you answer if the below statement holds true for few customers are willing to pay.

"to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years."

I also looked at the question stem "most seriously weaken" thats why I eliminated D because we are talking about tests but not implementation.

Let me know if you think otherwise.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:21 pm
I totally agree with you. But even if there is profit, can you answer if the below statement holds true for few customers are willing to pay.

"to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years."

I also looked at the question stem "most seriously weaken" thats why I eliminated D because we are talking about tests but not implementation.

Let me know if you think otherwise.

/you do have a point here...

But in my opinion..The conclusion depends on the argument.
ie..Significant profits will be there only if the current prices of cotton on the world market remain the same..

So if the pesticides are used then the argument that supports the conclusion falls apart..

Also, D implies one more thing..Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices ...

Does that mean all(80) are already paying higher prices ...and only few(20) will be paying significantly higher prices..

If that is the case , then farmers can still go for cotton.. as still 80 of them wud be payin "higher" prices...that might lead to a significant increase in their profit..

Hence, still IMO:B
:)
Thx
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1153
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:21 am
Thanked: 146 times
Followed by:2 members

by parallel_chase » Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:33 pm
We most definitely need an official answer now more than ever. :)

I have searched the OG as well as verbal workbook, i couldnt find this question anywhere. I also searched the archives but nothing.

One think i have come across in critical reasoning forums, people dont generally post the OA's.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:11 pm
@parallel_chase,,,:)will find the OA and the source for u... give me sumtime...:)



@annakool1009

pls post the original answer.....


thanks,
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:33 pm
Thanked: 5 times

by Vignesh.4384 » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:12 pm
IMO B.

Passage says : Certain cotton growing reagions have been infected by some insect . So the price of cotton has gone up. Farmers are planning 2 make some fast money because demand for cotton is more.

What if this situation can be brought back 2 normal ?
Then it is going to hurt the farmers plan.

Option B does exactly that. If a inexpensive pesticide is developed then it can be used in the "existing cotton growing regions", then the demand for cotton wil decrease and the farmers plan of making quick money wil take a hit.

I think the answer is D.

In a weaken question one should always attack the conclusion, i.e. by growing cotton the farmers would be able to take advantage of the increasing prices and hence significantly increase their income.

If there would be few customers to pay, farmers will not be able to increase their income.

Hence D.
@ parallel_chase: I think you are mis interpreting option D . what if most people are willing to pay the money they are playing now and only a few would pay more . This would not hurt the farmers that much as option B does.

Hope it helps.

Regards,
Vignesh
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: United States
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

by john1234 » Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:53 pm
IMO C.
Even impossible says I M possible
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:26 pm
raunekk wrote:There will always be more than one answer for any Gmat question(in CR )....

Tats why the question stem uses the word most!!

We have to choose the answer that is most convincing..

thx
I just want to address this common misconception about GMAT verbal.

For every question on the GMAT, there will be:

1 right answer; and
4 TERRIBLE answers.

There has never been an official GMAT question that had an answer for which one could accurately say "if the correct answer hadn't been there, then this answer would be correct".
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:33 pm
raunekk wrote:IMO:B

No doubt , we have to attack the conclusion in weakening questions.But we cannot just concentrate on the conclusion leaving the main argument behind.
HERE,
Stimulus argues:
Infestation lead to increase in the price of cotton but soyabeen prices are unaffected.

Thus farmers are planning to grow more cotton to take advantage of the situation.

Conclusion:Farmers are gonna take advantage of the situation by growing more cotton.

B says..,

The pesticides developed is effective on the infestation.

Thus when ,

Effective pestisides used=> reduction in infestation in cotton=>bring back the prices of cotton to their original price.

Thus this weakens the conclusion(decision) of farmers to grow more cotton for profit.

Now,D
D. Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

Agreed!! This does weaken d conclusion!!
But doesnt suffice the word "most" in the question stem.

suppose, there are total 100 consumers of cotton,

Few are willing to pay higher prices = 20 (supposition)

not willing to pay higher
(or those who will pay the normal price) = 80

Thus , even if only 20 are ready to pay higher price and 80 will pay the original price., still the total amount generated will be greater than the amount that wud have been generated with the normal amount.

So even if the profit is low, profit is there!!Thus farmers can still opt for growing more cotton!!Thus it doesnt weaken the conclusion to the extent required.

Thus, imo:B


Thanks.
I agree with 50% of your reply.

Your analysis of (B) is right on - if the insecticide stops the destruction of cotton crops, then the insect-driven high prices will no longer hold and cotton won't be a particularly valuable crop.

However, your analysis of (D) is off. The farmers' plan doesn't rely on cotton prices getting higher than they currently are - the plan relies on the current high price staying just where it is. So, as long as buyers are willing to continue to pay the current price, the farmers' plan will be just fine. Therefore, (d) has no impact on the argument and can be eliminated.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
Post new topic Post Reply