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

Redeem

Tough Weaken CR

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:40 pm
Thanked: 4 times

Tough Weaken CR

by Blimey72 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:24 pm
Although the organic farms in the agricultural community of Greendale are destined to shut down within the next decade as a result of competition from the organic mega-farm Full Foods, the farmland will not go unused for long. In the decade since the opening of OmniFoods, Inc., a non-organic farm conglomerate, a new owner has bought and reopened every farm in Greendale that has shut down due to competition with OmniFoods, Inc.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of OmniFoods, Inc. are expected to buy less nonorganic food than they did before the Full Foods farm opened in Greendale.

B. The new farms that have opened in the agricultural community of Greendale since OmniFoods, Inc. opened have been primarily organic farms.

C. The agricultural community of Greendale currently has more different farms operating within its borders than it ever has before.

D. Many farms in Greendale sell produce that is not available to buy from either OmniFoods, Inc. or from Full Foods.

E. The demand for organic food is expected to increase at a faster rate over the next decade than at any time over the past fifty years.

OA: B

Source: Knewton.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:29 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:10 members

by Night reader » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:17 pm
in other words prove that farmlands will NOT be used for long
Non-organic conglomerate bought and reopened organic farms; the farmland in Greendale is also organic, but cannot be bought and reopenned by Organic Full Foods and hence will stay unsed for long. The premise on which non-organic conglomerate Omni-Foods buying and reopening decision was based is Non-organic buys Organic, therefore Organic Full Foods should buy non-organic which is not the farmland :(

B. The new farms that have opened in the agricultural community of Greendale since OmniFoods, Inc. opened have been primarily organic farms.

StuartM wrote:Although the organic farms in the agricultural community of Greendale are destined to shut down within the next decade as a result of competition from the organic mega-farm Full Foods, the farmland will not go unused for long. In the decade since the opening of OmniFoods, Inc., a non-organic farm conglomerate, a new owner has bought and reopened every farm in Greendale that has shut down due to competition with OmniFoods, Inc.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of OmniFoods, Inc. are expected to buy less nonorganic food than they did before the Full Foods farm opened in Greendale.

B. The new farms that have opened in the agricultural community of Greendale since OmniFoods, Inc. opened have been primarily organic farms.

C. The agricultural community of Greendale currently has more different farms operating within its borders than it ever has before.

D. Many farms in Greendale sell produce that is not available to buy from either OmniFoods, Inc. or from Full Foods.

E. The demand for organic food is expected to increase at a faster rate over the next decade than at any time over the past fifty years.

OA: B

Source: Knewton.
My knowledge frontiers came to evolve the GMATPill's methods - the credited study means to boost the Verbal competence. I really like their videos, especially for RC, CR and SC. You do check their study methods at https://www.gmatpill.com
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:54 pm
A: We are asked here to hurt Omni foods bought out of organic farm lands, what people buy is making this option out of scope
B: Correct
C: out of scope, we are not intrested in border areas and different farms
D: Out of scope, there is no third varity Farm here (Org & in-org)
E: Not a bad one... this is weakening the first line only but not the requested question
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 am
Location: Hyderabad, India
Thanked: 49 times
Followed by:12 members
GMAT Score:700

by bubbliiiiiiii » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:43 pm
The way I attacked this question is to find the assumption first.

The assumption that I found here was "after every organic farm is closed, new farms that opened will be inorganic".
Since an assumption, though it doesnot strongly support the argument but, supports an argument to some extent; the answer would be something that would negate the assumption which is B in this case.

Hope it helps.
Regards,

Pranay
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:12 am
i dont find the cr tough one. i read option A and then B and choose the answer B even i didint read the other options.

reason

onmi foods is a non organic farm. the organic farms are shutting down in next decade. so new buyer of omni foods can nt help organic farms as he deals with non organic farm. so it weakens the argument
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:40 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by Blimey72 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:44 am
Thanks for the replies, guys.

It's classed as difficult according to Knewton and, to be honest, it tripped me up too.

I think it comes down to your concept what of 'the new farms' in answer B refers to. For B to weaken, 'the new farms' has to refer to the farms that closed and reopened.

However to me, a farm refers to the physical land and not to the name, type or organisation running it. A reopened farm, is just that - reopened - and not a new farm. Hence I deemed B out of scope, as new parcels of land are irrelevant to the question.

I suppose the definite article in 'the new farms' implies we're talking about the same farms in the argument, but that doesn't have to be the case. If the B had said 'the reopened farms' instead of 'the new farms' then B would be entirely clear.

Is the wording of the question ambiguous, or am I just being silly?
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 12:29 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by theforrestgump » Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:36 pm
This is based on a timeline...what we understand from this question is that
AT PRESENT: FullFoods is competing with organic farms and causing these organic farms to close down.
IN THE PAST: OmniFoods always bought farms that closed down due to competition from OmniFoods and re-opened them.
Conclusion: These farms that have closed down will not go unused for long, since OmniFoods will buy and reopen them.

Option B tells us that IN THE PAST when, a farm closed down and OmniFoods re-opened it, they re-opened it as organic....so IN THE PRESENT OmniFoods will not want to buy the farms that closed down due to FullFoods and re-open them as organic, as FullFoods will still create competition and force them to close down again.

Tadaa...!!!...this question is a rip-off from OG12#104.

GoodLuck
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:33 pm
Thanked: 158 times
Followed by:21 members

by pemdas » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:49 pm
I have just reviewed the referenced question 104 in OG12 and must say that I saw this question in GMAT Hack's verbal guide and the couple of posts indicate Knewton's source. The MAIN difference between the argument presented in the original question and the argument in question 104, OG12 is that OmniFoods initiates to open the farmlands here; in the OG question stores are opened on their own initiative. This makes total confusion in the argument presented in this question (posted) as there's no logic between Omnifoods opening farmlands as organic on their own initiative. WHY? To create more competition for themselves? In OG's question 104, the stores have opened one their own - they could be addressing competition independently, BUT here :( :( Total mess with this question's logic and cannot find any reason why answer B should be credited here at all. I would vote for no answer as the correct one - they don't pass the negation test, as argument is still alive after negating assumptions A-E. Answer choice A has some proximity to the correct answer BUT again it's not complete and would require us to seek another assumption to fill in the gap for the farmlands produce seel being tied to the market demand strictly. It doesn't say in the argument, neither choice A provides this, therefore ans. A is also not correct. I cannot find a correct answer here.

Asking experts to clarify this entry
theforrestgump wrote:This is based on a timeline...what we understand from this question is that
AT PRESENT: FullFoods is competing with organic farms and causing these organic farms to close down.
IN THE PAST: OmniFoods always bought farms that closed down due to competition from OmniFoods and re-opened them.
Conclusion: These farms that have closed down will not go unused for long, since OmniFoods will buy and reopen them.

Option B tells us that IN THE PAST when, a farm closed down and OmniFoods re-opened it, they re-opened it as organic....so IN THE PRESENT OmniFoods will not want to buy the farms that closed down due to FullFoods and re-open them as organic, as FullFoods will still create competition and force them to close down again.

Tadaa...!!!...this question is a rip-off from OG12#104.

GoodLuck
Success doesn't come overnight!
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Mon Feb 06, 2012 4:27 am
i received a pm regarding this thread.

this problem is essentially isomorphic to a problem seen in GMATPrep (which i guess is also in the OG). i've already discussed that problem at this link (from a different forum):
https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/pos ... tml#p30944

the logic in this problem is exactly the same, so you should be able to carry over the reasoning from one problem to the other.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1