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

Redeem

MGMAT Fastfood King's:

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:39 pm
Location: India

MGMAT Fastfood King's:

by singhran » Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:42 am
In January of last year, Fastfood King started using a new lowfat oil to cook its Fast Fries, instead of the less healthful corn oil that it had been using. Now Fastfood King is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt sales of Fast Fries. However, this claim is incorrect, since according to Fastfood King’s own sales figures, Fastfood King sold 10 percent more Fast Fries last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Fastfood King's claim?

Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King’s locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.

Fastfood King enjoys higher profit margins on its Soft Drinks than it does on Fast Fries.

Fastfood King’s customers prefer the taste of Fast Fries cooked in corn oil to Fast Fries cooked in lowfat oil.

The number of customers that visited Fastfood King locations was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.

The year before last, Fastfood King experienced a 20 percent increase in Fast Fries sales over the previous year.

Your opinion on this. OA after some replies.
Ranveer
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:59 am
Location: USA
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:1 members

by niraj_a » Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:12 pm
this is tricky as hell but I was trying to choose between A and E, and chose E.

one question though - doesn't last year mean the same thing as previous year?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:04 pm
Thanked: 6 times

by swati.sug » Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:20 pm
Answer should be A

A.

Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King’s locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.
The total sales increased by less than 10% still the fries sales went up supports the claim that sales of fries arent hurt.

B.This statement is out of scope and useless.Irrelevent

CThis again neither supports not defies the argument.Irrelevent

D This supports fastffod chains arguments that thier sales suffered as sales didnot increase in proportion to customers

E Irrelevent


What is the answer?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:04 pm
Thanked: 6 times

by swati.sug » Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:21 pm
Answer should be A

A.

Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King’s locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.
The total sales increased by less than 10% still the fries sales went up supports the claim that sales of fries arent hurt.

B.This statement is out of scope and useless.Irrelevent

CThis again neither supports not defies the argument.Irrelevent

D This supports fastffod chains arguments that thier sales suffered as sales didnot increase in proportion to customers

E Irrelevent


What is the answer?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:00 pm
Thanked: 4 times

Re: MGMAT Fastfood King's:

by nitin86 » Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:17 pm
singhran wrote:In January of last year, Fastfood King started using a new lowfat oil to cook its Fast Fries, instead of the less healthful corn oil that it had been using. Now Fastfood King is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt sales of Fast Fries. However, this claim is incorrect, since according to Fastfood King’s own sales figures, Fastfood King sold 10 percent more Fast Fries last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Fastfood King's claim?

Total sales of all foods at Fastfood King’s locations increased by less than 10 percent last year.

Fastfood King enjoys higher profit margins on its Soft Drinks than it does on Fast Fries.

Fastfood King’s customers prefer the taste of Fast Fries cooked in corn oil to Fast Fries cooked in lowfat oil.

The number of customers that visited Fastfood King locations was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.

The year before last, Fastfood King experienced a 20 percent increase in Fast Fries sales over the previous year.

Your opinion on this. OA after some replies.
IMO - its D

As, the assumption, the Fast food chain is making is that 'the sale may have increased, but the number of customers has decreased, and this may be due to the change in oil.

D contradicts that assumption.

a_niraj -> here "previous" year mean, year before the "last" year. As the starting statement of the argument is "In January of last year...."
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 7:40 am
Location: INDIA
Thanked: 4 times

by senthil » Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:16 am
my pick is A
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

reply

by raunekk » Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:40 am
i think its D..

It goes this way,

It says the sales figure of fries went up by 10%..

But what if the number of people visited increased ?
Suppose initially there were 100 people who visited and 60 bought fries,i.e 60%..

Now it the number of people coming in has increased by 20%,i.e 120
and sales of fries has increased by 10%,i.e 66 !!

But 66 is 55% of 120..!!That means even if the sales have increased the company is facing a loss as the customers have increased and that negates the claim.!!

i hope this helps..
whats d OA?
let me know if i am wrong..
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:39 pm
Location: India

by singhran » Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:10 am
This argument concerns the impact of the change in cooking oil used by Fastfood King, and whether or not this change had an adverse impact on sales. It is given that sales of Fast Fries increased by 10 percent subsequent to the change. The issue is whether or not this 10 percent increase compares favorably to the increase one would expect taking other factors into account, including in particular the percentage increase enjoyed by Fastfood King’s other offerings.

A. CORRECT. This statement indicates that Fastfood King’s total food sales increased by less than 10 percent. As the sales of Fast Fries increased at a higher rate of 10 percent, this strongly suggests that the change to lowfat oil did not adversely impact the sales of Fast Fries.


B. The profit margins of different Fastfood King offerings are not relevant to the argument.

C. Any preference for the taste of corn oil over the new lowfat oil would damage, not support, the conclusion that the change has not negatively impacted the sales of Fast Fries.

D. The fact that Fastfood King was visited by 20 percent more people last year suggests that consumption of Fast Fries, which increased by only 10 percent, may have been adversely affected by the change. This would weaken the conclusion, not strengthen it.

E. That the sales of Fast Fries increased by 20 percent in the previous year suggests that the rate of increase was slowed last year, possibly as a result of the cooking oil change. This would weaken the conclusion that the change did not have any negative impact on sales, rather than strengthen it.


Cheers
Ranveer
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Wed May 11, 2016 12:40 am
My intuition whispers that it is A
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1