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

Redeem

Question Pack 1 CR Q#1 | Revision

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
Location: Noida, India
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:740

Question Pack 1 CR Q#1 | Revision

by richachampion » Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:01 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the theatergoer's argument?

(A) When it switched from using coconut oil to using canola coil, Megaplex made sure that the chain received a great deal of publicity stressing the health benefits of the change.

(B) Megaplex makes more money on food and beverages sold at its theaters than it does on sales of movie tickets.

(C) In a survey to determine public response to the change to canola oil, very few of Megaplex's customers said that the change had affected their popcorn-buying habits.

(D) Total sales of all food and beverage items at Megaplex's movie theaters increased by less than five percent last year.

(E) Total attendance at Megaplex's movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.
R I C H A,
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
Location: Noida, India
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:740

by richachampion » Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:02 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

OA: E
R I C H A,
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
Location: Noida, India
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:740

by richachampion » Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:07 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

I am highly confused in this question.

Part 1: Theatergoer: In January _______ sales.

Part 2: That claim is false, however, since ______ year.

Part 1: is about the theatergoer that means If we weaken what he is saying we can solve the question.
Part 2: is about what the author of this Critical reasoning question is saying.
Part 2 is actually opposing what the Theatergoer is saying so in a way it is weakening.

We can solve this question in two ways -
Either by weakening what theatergoer is saying or by strengthening what the author of this question says because the author is actually weakening what the theatergoer is saying.

Experts am I right?
Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.
Decoding the argument -

Fact/Background Information: Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then.

Fact/Background Information: Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales.

Conclusion: That claim is false,
Reason for the Conclusion: however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Our Job : we have to weaken what theatergoer is saying or we have to strengthen the conclusion:
That claim is false,
In simple words we have to prove that sale has increased. Then how does E is proving this?
(E) Total attendance at Megaplex's movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before
Option E is dealing everything in %age that means total visitors increased by 20%, but sales of Popcorn only increased by 5%.(Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year. )
So ultimately this is reinforcing the theatergoer statement that sales have tripped down.
R I C H A,
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
Location: Boston, MA
Thanked: 1153 times
Followed by:128 members
GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:30 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

richachampion wrote:I am highly confused in this question.

Part 1: Theatergoer: In January _______ sales.

Part 2: That claim is false, however, since ______ year.

Part 1: is about the theatergoer that means If we weaken what he is saying we can solve the question.
Part 2: is about what the author of this Critical reasoning question is saying.
Part 2 is actually opposing what the Theatergoer is saying so in a way it is weakening.

We can solve this question in two ways -
Either by weakening what theatergoer is saying or by strengthening what the author of this question says because the author is actually weakening what the theatergoer is saying.

Experts am I right?
Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.
Decoding the argument -

Fact/Background Information: Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then.

Fact/Background Information: Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales.

Conclusion: That claim is false,
Reason for the Conclusion: however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Our Job : we have to weaken what theatergoer is saying or we have to strengthen the conclusion:
That claim is false,
In simple words we have to prove that sale has increased. Then how does E is proving this?
(E) Total attendance at Megaplex's movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before
Option E is dealing everything in %age that means total visitors increased by 20%, but sales of Popcorn only increased by 5%.(Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year. )
So ultimately this is reinforcing the theatergoer statement that sales have tripped down.
Megaplex claim: switching from coconut oil to canola oil hurt popcorn sales,

Theatergoer's conclusion: This claim is false. (Sales were not hurt by the switch - they were up 5%)

We're trying to weaken the theatergoer's conclusion. So we want to show that the Megaplex claim is true. In other words, we want to verify that switching from coconut oil to canola did, in fact, hurt popcorn sales, or rather, that sales would have been increased by more than 5% had the switch not been implemented. (This is where you went wrong: In simple words we have to prove that sale has increased; The sale did increase. We're given that. Again, the only way popcorn sales could have been hurt by the switch is if there's reason to believe that sales would have increased by more than 5% had the switch never happened. This is what E gives us. If ticket sales were up 20%, presumably, had the oil switch never happened, popcorn sales would have gone up by closer to 20%, rather than a measly 5%.
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2623
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:17 am
Location: Montreal
Thanked: 1090 times
Followed by:355 members
GMAT Score:780

by Ian Stewart » Tue Jul 11, 2017 8:27 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

richachampion wrote:I am highly confused in this question.

Part 1: Theatergoer: In January _______ sales.

Part 2: That claim is false, however, since ______ year.

Part 1: is about the theatergoer that means If we weaken what he is saying we can solve the question.
Part 2: is about what the author of this Critical reasoning question is saying.
Part 2 is actually opposing what the Theatergoer is saying so in a way it is weakening.
The entire paragraph after "Theatergoer:" is the theatergoer's argument. You've divided that paragraph into two parts, and attributed one part to the theatergoer, and the other part to the author of the CR question. But all of it should be attributed to the theatergoer.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Wed Jul 12, 2017 8:25 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

=
richachampion wrote:Theatergoer: In January of last year, the Megaplex chain of movie theaters started popping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Megaplex is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Megaplex's own sales figures, Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the theatergoer's argument?

(A) When it switched from using coconut oil to using canola coil, Megaplex made sure that the chain received a great deal of publicity stressing the health benefits of the change.

(B) Megaplex makes more money on food and beverages sold at its theaters than it does on sales of movie tickets.

(C) In a survey to determine public response to the change to canola oil, very few of Megaplex's customers said that the change had affected their popcorn-buying habits.

(D) Total sales of all food and beverage items at Megaplex's movie theaters increased by less than five percent last year.

(E) Total attendance at Megaplex's movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.
Premise: Megaplex sold five percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.
Conclusion: The switch from coconut oil to canola oil did not hurt popcorn sales.

To weaken the conclusion, the correct answer choice must show that the switch from coconut oil to canola oil DID hurt popcorn sales.

E: Total attendance at Megaplex's movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.
Here, a 20% INCREASE IN ATTENDANCE yielded only a 5% INCREASE IN POPCORN SALES, weakening the conclusion that popcorn sales were not hurt by the switch from coconut oil to canola oil.

The correct answer is E.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1