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

Redeem

FastMart convenience store

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:19 am
Thanked: 1 times

FastMart convenience store

by kobel51 » Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:30 pm
FastMart, a convenience store chain, is planning to add pancake syrup to the items it sells. FastMart stores do not have shelf space to stock more than one variety of syrup. Surveys of FastMart customers indicate that one-fourth of them prefer low-calorie syrup, while three-fourths prefer regular syrup. Since FastMart's highest priority is to maximize sales, the obvious strategy for it is to stock regular syrup.

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

(A) People buying pancake syrup at convenience stores, unlike those buying it at supermarkets, generally buy it only a few times.

(B) People who prefer low-calorie syrup generally use about the same amount of syrup on their pancakes as those who prefer regular syrup.

(C) Regular syrup does not sell for a higher price per unit than low-calorie syrup.

(D) In general, customers who prefer regular syrup will buy low-calorie syrup if regular is unavailable, but those who prefer low-calorie will not buy regular syrup.

(E) Sales of syrup are not expected to account for a large proportion of total dollar sales at the average FastMart store.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
Location: Everywhere
Thanked: 503 times
Followed by:192 members
GMAT Score:780

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:57 pm
Premise: we can only stock one kind of syrup.
Premise: most customers prefer regular syrup.
Conclusion: to maximize sales, stock regular syrup.

We're looking for something that hurts this argument.

A: irrelevant to types of syrup.

B: okay, but there are still more fans of regular syrup, so stocking regular syrup makes sense.

C: okay, but if we sell more units, we make more money

D: bingo. If we stock low-calorie syrup, fans of regular will buy it. If we stock regular, fans of low-calorie will NOT buy it. This opens up the possibility that we can sell more low-calorie syrup than regular syrup.

E: we are not concerned with overall sales at the store, just sales of syrup.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 1:30 am
Thanked: 335 times
Followed by:98 members

by Patrick_GMATFix » Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:59 pm
The objective is to maximize sales. To achieve it, the argument says that we should stock the regular syrup because 75% of customers surveyed prefer it. There are 3 ways to weaken an argument:

1) Negate the assumptions. The argument assumes that (a) survey results reflect customer preferences at large, particularly for those customers who actually buy syrup, (b) to maximize sales it wouldn't be better to stock something else entirely (instead of syrup), (c) if the store doesn't stock the type of syrup a customer prefers, that customer will not buy the type available on the shelf. An answer that negates any of these assumptions will weaken the argument.

2) Add counter premise. Any evidence that stocking the regular syrup will not maximize sales would weaken the argument. Perhaps ppl who buy the less popular syrup spend so much $ elsewhere in the store that we're better off attracting them.

3) Draw an alternate conclusion from the given premise.

The full solution below is taken from the GMATFix App.

Image

-Patrick
  • Ask me about tutoring.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
Elite Legendary Member
Posts: 10392
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Thanked: 2867 times
Followed by:511 members
GMAT Score:800

by [email protected] » Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:19 pm
Hi Kobel51,

This CR question asks us to WEAKEN the logic behind the prompt, so we have to understand the logic and then ATTACK it.

The Facts:
-FastMart is planning to add pancake syrup to its stores, but can only stock ONE variety of syrup.
-Customer surveys indicate that 1/4 of customers prefer low-calorie syrup and 3/4 prefer regular syrup.
-FastMart's priority is to MAXIMIZE SALES

The Conclusion:
-Stock regular syrup

The Logic:
-Since 3/4 of customers in the survey claimed to prefer regular syrup, FastMart assumes that this is a representative sample of all of its customers. Thus, FastMart's plan is to stock the item that most customers appear to prefer (so the store can MAXIMIZE SALES).

We're asked to WEAKEN the logic, so we need an answer that states that this plan WON'T maximize sales. Since the Facts include a comparison between regular and low-calorie syrup, the correct answer could mention something about how low-calorie syrup would outsell regular syrup.

Answer D describes how the current plan WON'T MAXIMIZE SALES and further describes what WILL maximize sales.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Contact Rich at [email protected]
Image
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:37 am
Location: Kolkata, India
Thanked: 50 times
Followed by:2 members

by Abhishek009 » Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:18 am
kobel51 wrote:FastMart, a convenience store chain, is planning to add pancake syrup to the items it sells. FastMart stores do not have shelf space to stock more than one variety of syrup. Surveys of FastMart customers indicate that one-fourth of them prefer low-calorie syrup, while three-fourths prefer regular syrup. Since FastMart's highest priority is to maximize sales, the obvious strategy for it is to stock regular syrup.
Plan - Add Pancake Syrup

Limitation - Shelf Space to store more than one variety of Syrup.

Surveys - 25% prefer Low Calorie Syrup and 75% Prefer Regular Syrup.

Conclusion - The store would stock Regular Syrup to maximize Profit and Sales.

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

Our Objective here is to attack the Argument ( Conclusion )


(A) People buying pancake syrup at convenience stores, unlike those buying it at supermarkets, generally buy it only a few times.

Irrelevant.

(B) People who prefer low-calorie syrup generally use about the same amount of syrup on their pancakes as those who prefer regular syrup.

Out of scope and irrelevant.

(C) Regular syrup does not sell for a higher price per unit than low-calorie syrup.

Out of Scope and Irrelevant.

(D) In general, customers who prefer regular syrup will buy low-calorie syrup if regular is unavailable, but those who prefer low-calorie will not buy regular syrup.

Regular Syrup buyers (Majority) can switch to Low Calorie Syrup if the former is unavailable.
However if Low Calorie Syrup ( Minority ) will prefer not to switch to Regular Syrup.

Thus low Calorie Syrup Buyers won't switch to Regular Syrup and the strategy proposed to be Implemented won't be effective.

The Store most stock Regular Syrup to maximize Profit and Sales.

(E) Sales of syrup are not expected to account for a large proportion of total dollar sales at the average FastMart store.

Out of scope.


Hence IMO(D)
Abhishek
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1