Critical Reasoning

Three large companies and seven small companies currently manufacture a product with potential military applications. If the government regulates the industry, it will institute a single set of manufacturing specifications to which all ten companies will have to adhere. In this case, therefore, since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications, only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument relies?

A. None of the three large companies will go out of business if the government does not regulate the manufacture of the product.
B. It would cost more to convert the production lines of the small companies to a new set of manufacturing specifications than it would to convert the production lines of the large companies.
C. Industry lobbyists will be unable to dissuade the government from regulating the industry.
D. Assembly of the product produced according to government manufacturing specifications would be more complex than current assembly procedures.
E. None of the seven small companies currently manufactures the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.

OA: E

richachampion wrote:Three large companies and seven small companies currently manufacture a product with potential military applications. If the government regulates the industry, it will institute a single set of manufacturing specifications to which all ten companies will have to adhere. In this case, therefore, since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications, only the three large companies will be able to remain in business.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument relies?

A. None of the three large companies will go out of business if the government does not regulate the manufacture of the product.

It is a reverse causality. I think this option would have been of any significance if the question was not of a assumption, but strengthen or weaken.

B. It would cost more to convert the production lines of the small companies to a new set of manufacturing specifications than it would to convert the production lines of the large companies.

There sounds no reason to assume that -

The cost to convert the production lines of the small companies > The cost to convert the production lines of the large companies.
If the cost would have been same or perhaps lesser than The cost to convert the production lines of the large companies. Still this doesn't answer whether for small companies that cost is or would be feasible to make the changes. It is tweaked version to distract many aspirants.

C. Industry lobbyists will be unable to dissuade the government from regulating the industry.

Completely Nonsensical or OFS in a way challenging the premise.

D. Assembly of the product produced according to government manufacturing specifications would be more complex than current assembly procedures.

Completely Nonsensical or OFS

E. None of the seven small companies currently manufactures the product to a set of specifications that would match those the government would institute if the industry were to be regulated.

The correct answer.

Experts, Please chime in and validate the reasoning.

this is an assumption question so lets look for the gap between argument and conclusion.

conclusion : only the three large companies will be able to remain in business..
argument : since none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of manufacturing specifications.

gap : question is why none of the seven small companies can afford to convert their production lines to a new set of MS??

ans possibilities:
1. tuff specification, more man power needed, and small comp. do not have that.
2. cost related problems, which small can;'t afford but big one can.

lets look at the answer choices.

A. so how come small one go out of the business if this happened. not an answer.
B. it would cost more, fare but is it enough to make then go out of the business. obscure here.
C. OFS
D. This is equal for all the 7 companies and if so then all of them go out. not only small one.
E. eliminated all rest of the option but i am not convinced that how come this is assumption. this choice is telling us that none of the companies can convert product lines for new MS.

Can someone help me to look for a better picture.

Thanks!