assumption

[kartik1979]

To prevent its tenants from relocating their o¢ ces, a building
management company has hired a customer service employee
who monitors tenant satisfaction. When the new employee
determines that a tenant may be considering relocation, the
management company o§ers the tenant beneÖts, such as
reduced rent, to induce the tenant to stay. Since hiring the new
employee, the management company has cut in half the number
of its tenants who have relocated. The new employee, therefore,
is increasing the management companyís proÖts by reducing
tenant turnover.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument
depends?
(A) The presence of the new employee increases the
satisfaction of all tenants, not just those who may be
considering relocation.
(B) The costs of the new employee and the beneÖts occuredeed
to induce tenants to stay do not outweigh the financial
beneÖt of reducing tenant turnover.
(C) The new employee was hired on the recommendation
of a consultant who has consistently increased the proÖts
of other building management companies.
(D) The new employee was hired before the summer months,
when most companies choose to relocate their o¢ ces.
(E) The cost of refurbishing an empty o¢ ce before seeking a
new tenant outweighs the cost of providing beneÖts that
induce a current tenant to stay.


oa-bi dont know why

[pandeyvineet24]

IMO B.
B reemphasizes the cause mentioned in the argument.

If the costs of the new employee and the benefits
to induce tenants are more than the profits of the company then the conclusion falls apart.

[gmatmachoman]

IMO B.
B reemphasizes the cause mentioned in the argument.

If the costs of the new employee and the benefits
to induce tenants are more than the profits of the company then the conclusion falls apart.

IMO B...Its a nice breather question..

[kris77]

I'd be shocked if it wasn't B