Critical Reasoning

A negative review of a popular restaurant claimed that the wait staff was rude and the food was overpriced. This review caused sales to drop precipitously which, in turn, forced the original owners to sell the business. The new owners revised the menu and dismissed most of the wait staff. After three months, however, sales had improved by less than 1%.

Which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of why sales at the restaurant have not improved?

The new owners could not determine who were the rudest members of the wait staff.
New menu items offered by the new owners are now more affordable.
The new owners neglected to advertise the fact that the restaurant is now under new management.
The new owners began managing the restaurant during the summer, when sales are unusually high.
Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items opened across the street.

Three choices are really attractive :

a>if the rude staff was not recognized at least the menu was fixed. So this does not address both parts of the arguement.

c>advertisement was ignored-mmmm, so what- people come to eat in a restaurant; not to date the owners. so wont make a difference if the management was changed. (you can actually argue that this option may be correct)

e>Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items recently opened across the street.- i would go for this. This states the alternate cause for the stated effect in this cause-effect argument.

sushbis wrote:A negative review of a popular restaurant claimed that the wait staff was rude and the food was overpriced. This review caused sales to drop precipitously which, in turn, forced the original owners to sell the business. The new owners revised the menu and dismissed most of the wait staff. After three months, however, sales had improved by less than 1%.

Which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of why sales at the restaurant have not improved?

The new owners could not determine who were the rudest members of the wait staff.
New menu items offered by the new owners are now more affordable.
The new owners neglected to advertise the fact that the restaurant is now under new management.
The new owners began managing the restaurant during the summer, when sales are unusually high.
Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items opened across the street.

I feel C is the correct answer, because in stem the reason given for the decrees of the sale is the bad review and C considers the same. New owner didnt advertise the change of management so people still have bad perception about the restaurant.

+1 for C

I think the question stem is wrong and that this should be an EXCEPT question.
Answer B

Whats the source of this problem ? whats the OA given ?

well tight call between A and C ...i will go with C

whats wrong wid E...
between C and E .. E seems to be the beter choice

Yes ,it is difficult to choose between C and E.
But if we think logically about E then there are two possiblities.
1.If new restaurent is performing better then it will make adverse impact on the sales of current
restaurent.But in argument sales for current restaurent is improved.
2.If new restaurent is not performing well then it will make positive impact on the sales of current restaurent.But the question asks the reason for bad performance of current restaurent.
So both of these possibilities go agains this answer choice.

Thats why we can definitely go with C

between C and E it is.

E gives competition as a cause not mentioned in the argument.

C gives information gap as the cause.This is much close to the argument and hence better.

C it is.

sushbis wrote:A negative review of a popular restaurant claimed that the wait staff was rude and the food was overpriced. This review caused sales to drop precipitously which, in turn, forced the original owners to sell the business. The new owners revised the menu and dismissed most of the wait staff. After three months, however, sales had improved by less than 1%.

Which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of why sales at the restaurant have not improved?

The new owners could not determine who were the rudest members of the wait staff.
New menu items offered by the new owners are now more affordable.
The new owners neglected to advertise the fact that the restaurant is now under new management.
The new owners began managing the restaurant during the summer, when sales are unusually high.
Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items opened across the street.

My explanation for C

before the review: the quality of the restaurant : rude staff, over priced food--> nothing happen with sale
After the review: Sale down

So the fact here is that reviews normally have important effect on the sale
So the correct answer should adress the link between sale and review.
C is correct.

What is OA?

I would say C as well - customers have been advised not to go there, without knowing that the staff was different and the menu was different. Hence sales could not possibly increase.

+1 for C

Clearly, the answer is C.

Regards,
Dhruv