Critical Reasoning

why isnt C correct ?

IMO D
A) but it also decrease the revenue
B) lines inside is out of scope
C) we are talking about people who wait in line.... not about people who have passes.
D) If people don't prefer overcrowding, they might not come...
E) % and numbers are different.

cans wrote:IMO D
A) but it also decrease the revenue
B) lines inside is out of scope
C) we are talking about people who wait in line.... not about people who have passes.
D) If people don't prefer overcrowding, they might not come...
E) % and numbers are different.

B is the OA .

man this is confusing

IMO: B

although entrance time is reduced to some extent, if the congestion in the park is heavy, then the managers plan will be unfeasible: more people cannot visit the park, and the park cannot make more money...

i think this helps...

hoji wrote:IMO: B

although entrance time is reduced to some extent, if the congestion in the park is heavy, then the managers plan will be unfeasible: more people cannot visit the park, and the park cannot make more money...

i think this helps...

actually it becomes somewhat easy once you know the oa . if you dont know the oa , u feel uncertain until u know the oa

mundasingh123 wrote:

hoji wrote:IMO: B

although entrance time is reduced to some extent, if the congestion in the park is heavy, then the managers plan will be unfeasible: more people cannot visit the park, and the park cannot make more money...

i think this helps...

actually it becomes somewhat easy once you know the oa . if you dont know the oa , u feel uncertain until u know the oa

agree...

B.

If the primary goal is to reduce wait time, then increasing wait time inside the part isn't going to help attract new visitors.

Conclusion: Increasing attendants will help streamline visitors and reduce the waiting time, as a result more people will visit the park and this will result in higher revenues

B addresses this conclusion by pointing out that, if the lines inside the park results in longer average waiting time than it does outside, the manager's plan falls apart

C has no bearing on the conclusion

Hey guys,

Thanks for the PM to join in! This one is a little tricky but keep in mind that the question is asking why the reasoning is flawed. And the reasoning is essentially:

-If we can reduce wait times, more people will come

Well, B shows that the wait times won't be fixed by overstaffing the main gates - the REAL wait comes once you're inside. The manager is proposing that "people hate waiting, so I'll fix that", but if they're only going to have to wait all over again past that checkpoint then he hasn't removed that problem.

The problem with C is that those people with season passes already exist - they're already NOT a part of the problem since they don't deal with the lines. His whole plan is to shorten lines to bring in NEW people who must either not come or not return for repeat business because they hate the lines. Those who never wait in line just don't count toward his proposal at all, since they wouldn't be affected either way by his proposal to shorten the outside wait time.

D is pretty interesting, but again keep in mind that his whole goal is to bring in NEW people that aren't currently willing to wait in the lines. So D has a similar element as C - those people who prefer congestion aren't really his target group at all...he's trying to attract more of those who are against congestion, and B is the answer that suggests that his plan won't appease them since it only moves the congestion from one point to another.

Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Hey guys,

Thanks for the PM to join in! This one is a little tricky but keep in mind that the question is asking why the reasoning is flawed. And the reasoning is essentially:

-If we can reduce wait times, more people will come


The problem with C is that those people with season passes already exist - they're already NOT a part of the problem since they don't deal with the lines. His whole plan is to shorten lines to bring in NEW people who must either not come or not return for repeat business because they hate the lines. Those who never wait in line just don't count toward his proposal at all, since they wouldn't be affected either way by his proposal to shorten the outside wait time.

Thanks Brian for helping . But the lines at the entrance are very short because majority of the visitors have passes , then why does it have to be that shortening the lines would bring in new people

Ah, good point - but remember that you cannot change the premises in the stimulus...those are always true. You can only attack the logic and the way that they're used.

The given information says that his proposal will reduce the wait from 30 minutes to 10 minutes. So we're stuck with a 30-minute wait, regardless of whether the season pass holders don't wait at all. That fact cannot change, so we do know that there is a significant wait for the new, single-use customers that he's trying to attract.

Brian@VeritasPrep wrote:Ah, good point - but remember that you cannot change the premises in the stimulus...those are always true. You can only attack the logic and the way that they're used.

The given information says that his proposal will reduce the wait from 30 minutes to 10 minutes. So we're stuck with a 30-minute wait, regardless of whether the season pass holders don't wait at all. That fact cannot change, so we do know that there is a significant wait for the new, single-use customers that he's trying to attract.

Hi Brian ,arent these very subtle difference between B , C and D . Wait time Inside , Wait time outside etc

Yeah, I definitely think this one is among the most subtle I've seen. I'll readily admit that I had to do some re-reading on this one to clarify exactly what was going on. But that's what hard questions will do...

And if we break this one down systematically, it's not really as much about "wait time inside" / "wait time outside". It's about the flaw in reasoning. The reasoning in the stimulus is that "if we cut down on wait time for people getting into the park we'll attract more people". And the assumption that that reasoning makes is that "people aren't attending because they're turned off by waiting too much in line". The answer choice that demonstrates that those people will still have to wait in line is the one that shows that the plan won't work.

So, systematically, the correct answer is the one that attacks that logic between the premise and the conclusion.