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

Redeem

Mainline Airways

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 401
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 9:21 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

Mainline Airways

by NSNguyen » Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:07 am
Mainline Airways was bought by its employees six years ago. Three years ago, Mainline hired QualiCo Advertising Agency to handle its promotions and advertising division. Today Mainline’s profits are over 20 percent higher than they were five years ago and 10 percent higher than they were three years ago. Employee ownership and a good advertising agency have combined to make Mainline more profitable.
Which of the following best describes the weak point in the argument above?
(A) It fails to establish a causal connection between the change in ownership at Mainline Airways and the hiring of QualiCo, on the one hand, and the rise in Mainline’s profits, on the other.
(B) It presents no evidence showing that employee-owned airlines are any more profitable than other airlines.
(C) It assumes that the profits of Mainline Airways will continue to rise.
(D) It gives no exact figures for the current profits of Mainline Airways.
(E) It fails to explain how the profits of Mainline Airways are calculated.
Please share your idea and your reasoning :D
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 9:25 am
Thanked: 21 times

by reachac » Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:06 am
IMO A
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:09 am
Location: India
Thanked: 6 times

by kiranlegend » Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:05 pm
clearly C, D, and E are out.

A is better than B as A covers about both employees and the qualico agency.. :lol:

better explanation pls?:)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:42 pm
IMO:A

Rest dont make sense!
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 177
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:06 am
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

Re: Mainline Airways

by perfectstranger » Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:14 am
NSNguyen wrote:Mainline Airways was bought by its employees six years ago. Three years ago, Mainline hired QualiCo Advertising Agency to handle its promotions and advertising division. Today Mainline’s profits are over 20 percent higher than they were five years ago and 10 percent higher than they were three years ago. Employee ownership and a good advertising agency have combined to make Mainline more profitable.
Which of the following best describes the weak point in the argument above?


There is no causation which leads to profits risen.

1- Mainline was bought 6 years ago.
2-It started to advertise 3 years ago

so 2 premises above does not show that employee ownership's change does not lead the advertising decision since 3 years difference exists.

Second point is that comprassion between now and 5 years , it is unclear because it does not compare now and 6-7 years before buying attempt.

So the answer is A
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 401
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 9:21 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by NSNguyen » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:19 am
OA: A
Please share your idea and your reasoning :D
https://bmnmed.com/home/
https://nguyensinguyen.vietnam21.org
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Wed May 11, 2016 3:04 am
A is the most suitable option in this case.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1