Broadcasting a professional football game allows many members of the public to see the game free of charge, and these broadcasts generally do not affect ticket sales. The team owner of a small arena football team has decided to increase interest in the team by transmitting the games over the Internet. Owners of other sports teams have disagreed with this action, contending that fans of the arena team will not want to attend games if they can instead watch the games on the Internet. However, the arena team owner believes that fans may become interested in the team by seeing the games on the Internet, and these individuals will be more likely to purchase tickets.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first is a justification that is opposed by the arena team owner's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
The first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan.
The first is a forecast in support of the arena team owner; the second is data against that forecast.
The first is a system of causality that the arena team owner predicts will be applicable to the situation at hand; the second is a general principle that the arena team owner believes is factual.
The first is data that strengthens the strategy of the arena team owner; the second represents a pattern of causality that validates the strategy.
C is wrong. Can answer be B?
OA not known as Kaplan has not shared right answers
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Boldface New question from Kaplan
This topic has expert replies
-
saxenashobhit
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:53 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
- Followed by:1 members
-
gauravgundal
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:15 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 13 times
IMO: B
I doubt about this CR. Is it really from Kaplan?
Bcoz the first bold statement states that broadcasting a ... generally does not affect ticket sales
whereas the arena team owner believes fans watching games on Internet, can/more likely result in fans purchasing tickets..
From my point of view,the first bold statement may support the arena team owner's plan.
Still let see what Experts have to say on this?
I doubt about this CR. Is it really from Kaplan?
Bcoz the first bold statement states that broadcasting a ... generally does not affect ticket sales
whereas the arena team owner believes fans watching games on Internet, can/more likely result in fans purchasing tickets..
From my point of view,the first bold statement may support the arena team owner's plan.
Still let see what Experts have to say on this?
-
saxenashobhit
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 8:53 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
- Followed by:1 members
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
received a pm.
the first boldface states a fact that validates the owner's plan -- in other words, it shows that (at least in professional football) getting your team on television will increase exposure while not decreasing ticket sales. this is the owner's plan.
if the second boldface were true, the fewer people would buy tickets to see the arena football team play; this result would counter the owner's original plan.
also, the second is not "data"; it is purely hypothetical.
totally backward; the owner's plan is basically designed to mimic the result of the first boldface, and, moreover, the second boldface is a consideration that would work directly against the owner's plan.The first is a justification that is opposed by the arena team owner's conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
CORRECTThe first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan.
the first boldface states a fact that validates the owner's plan -- in other words, it shows that (at least in professional football) getting your team on television will increase exposure while not decreasing ticket sales. this is the owner's plan.
if the second boldface were true, the fewer people would buy tickets to see the arena football team play; this result would counter the owner's original plan.
the first boldface is not a "forecast"; it is an observation of something that has already happened.The first is a forecast in support of the arena team owner; the second is data against that forecast.
also, the second is not "data"; it is purely hypothetical.
the second principle, if true, would work directly against the owner's plan, so the owner obviously does not think that it is factual.The first is a system of causality that the arena team owner predicts will be applicable to the situation at hand; the second is a general principle that the arena team owner believes is factual.
the second works directly against the strategy, rather than validating it.The first is data that strengthens the strategy of the arena team owner; the second represents a pattern of causality that validates the strategy.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
beatthegmat.garry
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:07 pm
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:1 members
Thanks !!
But I still fail to understand how (B) as it is given, be right?
The 2 boldfaced statements are contradictory to each other so how can we say "The first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan."
Its says the second is the re-consideration of the plan !!
Do you mind elaborating your explanation?
Thanks !
But I still fail to understand how (B) as it is given, be right?
The 2 boldfaced statements are contradictory to each other so how can we say "The first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan."
Its says the second is the re-consideration of the plan !!
Do you mind elaborating your explanation?
Thanks !
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
heh. i read that as "against the plan" ... i didn't even notice that it said "again of that plan". i read these things really fast; people send me a lot of messages |:beatthegmat.garry wrote:Thanks !!
But I still fail to understand how (B) as it is given, be right?
The 2 boldfaced statements are contradictory to each other so how can we say "The first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan."
Its says the second is the re-consideration of the plan !!
Do you mind elaborating your explanation?
Thanks !
"against that plan" is almost certainly what the original problem said; this is probably just a sloppy transcription. ("a consideration again of that plan" is not properly written english; no kaplan author would have written such a thing, so there is obviously a mistranscription somewhere along the line.)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
scroll up 3 posts from yours (or 4 posts from this one).jaguar123 wrote:Hi,
Can anyone explain what is wrong with E.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
amit2k9
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 9:09 am
- Location: pune
- Thanked: 36 times
- Followed by:3 members
Thus B it is.saxenashobhit wrote:Broadcasting a professional football game allows many members of the public to see the game free of charge, and these broadcasts generally do not affect ticket sales. The team owner of a small arena football team has decided to increase interest in the team by transmitting the games over the Internet. Owners of other sports teams have disagreed with this action, contending that fans of the arena team will not want to attend games if they can instead watch the games on the Internet. However, the arena team owner believes that fans may become interested in the team by seeing the games on the Internet, and these individuals will be more likely to purchase tickets.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first is a justification that is opposed by the arena team owner's conclusion; the second is that conclusion. -- 2nd is not a conclusion rather a reasoning by other owners. POE.
The first recognizes a factor that supports the arena team owner's plan; the second is a consideration again of that plan. -- true.
The first is a forecast in support of the arena team owner; the second is data against that forecast.-- 2nd is a reasoning rather than a data.POE.
The first is a system of causality that the arena team owner predicts will be applicable to the situation at hand; the second is a general principle that the arena team owner believes is factual.-- Arena owner states a reasoning opposite to the 2nd part mentioned here. 1st part - Arena owner is not predicting that the fact will apply to his reasoning. POE.
The first is data that strengthens the strategy of the arena team owner; the second represents a pattern of causality that validates the strategy. -- 2nd is against the arena owner's conclusion.POE.
C is wrong. Can answer be B?
OA not known as Kaplan has not shared right answers
For Understanding Sustainability,Green Businesses and Social Entrepreneurship visit -https://aamthoughts.blocked/
(Featured Best Green Site Worldwide-https://bloggers.com/green/popular/page2)
(Featured Best Green Site Worldwide-https://bloggers.com/green/popular/page2)
