CR 1000 T4 Q19

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:15 am
Location: Colombo, Sri Lanka
Thanked: 3 times

CR 1000 T4 Q19

by neha.patni » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:43 am
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
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:10 pm
Thanked: 50 times
Followed by:4 members

by akhpad » Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:13 am
10 percent of cigarette smokers switch brands. Yet the manufacturers spend 10 percent of their gross receipts on cigarette promotion.

Then would not have worse off economically even they had not done.

suppose if it is a single company, it has a major effect but it didn't [because we have to criticize conclusion].

So, It considered as whole not for single company.

E.

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:46 am

by jawahirjunu » Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:05 am
I think it should be C as percentage of smokers switching to other brand is only 10 %