A city’s public transportation board has decided to cut costs by reduc

Choosing between (A) and (B), i prefer (B).
We are talking about quality of service. If buses lose for 30 min in traffic jams, the increased interval won't harm riders.

i think A deals straight with the issue. the stimulus is about cost cutting and A states just that.B i think weakens the argument.
i have confirmed from other sources . The OA is A
thank you.

I dont like this question at all. The statement clearly refers to the announcement which concerns the quality. A does not deal at all with the quality. What is the source?

I agree with you. None of the options shows how reduction in frequency can prevent diminished QOS.

A - is suggesting that the pedestrian, who may have been causing the traffic congestion because of bad walkway bridges, would use the bridges, reducing the congestion.
Way too many assumptions.
1. Whether the pedestrian use the bridges after maintenance.
2. How long will it take for bridges to be built.
3. Definition of QOS: Is congestion one of the factors to determine QOS?
What if QOS means more frequent bus services.

There is a reasoning gap in the argument,as how reduction in frequency will not effect the services has to be linked.

A does bring out the factor that maintenance cost will be reduced,which is possible only if the services is not effected too. Also the bridge repairmen-t is a good news too.

B is a neutral answer here.

+1 A

The rush hour will affect more the service if the frequency is reduced.
For example: If the rush hour adds 5 minutes to the regular frequency (8 minutes), a passenger would have to wait 13 minutes (8 + 5).
With the new frequency, the passsenger would have to wait 15 minutes (10 + 5).

Only option A Reducing the cost.
Ans. A

Can someone please explain the explanation to this question?

GMATNinja generis Bunuel AjiteshArun egmat
Thanks in advance

It seems to me that A is out of scope with respect to quality of the bus service

While D seems to me the ideal condition to afford a reduction in the AVERAGE frequency while avoiding to impair the (overall) quality of the service.

Posted from my mobile device

I think ‘B’ is better than ‘A’, for what it’s worth. ‘A’ just seems grossly out of scope.

Posted from my mobile device

Can someone help to understand why OA is A and not B? Although according to my understanding, B is better than the rest but definitely not best option.
GMATNinja egmat

bonzai : Please share the official explanation.

Here, none of the options shows how reduction in frequency can prevent diminished QOS and conclusion is more about service improvement.
but option A is about cost with some reasoning gap.

B cannot be the answer. think about it: how can reducing the frequency of buses help in rush hours? it will make passengers further uncomfortable with the service
A seems to me to be out of scope: the goal is to improve the bus service not general infrastructure of the service
D seems to me a good basis to keep the quality of service high by tackling only the bus lines used by few people.

None of the options except B touches anything that can be related to quality of service. But B, in my opinion, weakens the announcement since during peak hours the services will be effectively spaced even more, possibly causing inconvenience to the customers. A could be the answer if the cost cutting part were to be strengthened, but that is not the case here. Clearly the question needs correction, whatever source it is from.
_________________

(A) The less frequent use of the buses will lower maintenance costs, resulting in savings that can be used for much-needed repairs of the city’s pedestrian bridges.
This definitely talks about the reduction in time duration and the additional benefits therefore definitely strengthens


(B) At rush hour, congestion in the city slows bus service by thirty percent.
THis weakens since in addition to the slowing by congestion if there is a additional it will definitely affects adversly


(C) Because of a robust economy in the city, passenger patronage has increased substantially in recent years.
If the patronage shou;d be increased not decreased therefore out

(D) The public transportation board has recently gathered data on the levels of ridership on all bus lines, showing that some lines are used by many more riders than others.
This doesn't have the right impac as A

(E) The contract with the bus drivers union stipulates that the city not lay off any drivers because of reduced bus service.
This is thoroughly out of context and doesn't impact the slighest

Therefore IMO A