Critical Reasoning

Surveys show that every year only 10 percent of cigarette smokers switch brands. Yet the manufacturers have been spending an amount equal to 10 percent of their gross receipts on cigarette promotion in magazines. It follows from these figures that inducing cigarette smokers to switch brands did not pay, and that cigarette companies would have been no worse off economically if they had dropped their advertising.

Of the following, the best criticism of the conclusion that inducing cigarette smokers to switch brands did not pay is that the conclusion is based on

(A) computing advertising costs as a percentage of gross receipts, not of overall costs
(B) past patterns of smoking and may not carry over to the future
(C) the assumption that each smoker is loyal to a single brand of cigarettes at any one time
(D) the assumption that each manufacturer produces only one brand of cigarettes
(E) figures for the cigarette industry as a whole and may not hold for a particular company

OA: E
What's wrong with options B and D?

Option A - INCORRECT.
Computing advertising cost as a percentage of gross receipts and investing it on advertising does not affect the interest of the smokers.

Option B - INCORRECT.
This option is also one of the main reason, inducing cigarette smokers to switch brand won't be cost effective. Cigarette smokers find it easy to stick to their old pattern of smoking rather than introducing a new one in the future.

Option C - INCORRECT.
The assumption that each smoker is loyal to a single brand of cigarette is true and can be one of the causes why advertising for smokers to switch brand is in effective.

Option D - INCORRECT.
The assumption that each manufacturer produces one brand of cigarette is possible to affect the choice of cigarette smokers.

Option E - CORRECT.
Figures of the cigarette industry may be low and may affect the choice of cigarette smokers in switching from one brand to a new one.