monir6000 wrote:
A convenience store manager noticed that a cooler which had been stocked with only a cola product and an iced-tea product had 15 colas left at the end of the day but only 3 iced-tea beverages. As a result, the manager reasoned that he should increase the amount of iced tea and decrease the amount of cola he ordered from the distributor.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the manager's rationale for ordering more iced tea and less cola?
a. The cooler in question is the only place in the store where the cola and iced tea beverages are stocked.
b. On that day, a month-long $1,000,000 sweepstakes began, with prizes awarded via the bottlecaps on the iced tea beverage.
c. At the beginning of the day, the cooler was stocked with at least as many of the iced tea beverages as of the cola beverages.
d. On the subsequent day, the remaining three iced tea beverages all sold within the first hour after the store opened.
e. During that week, a special "buy one, get one free" sale was in effect for the cola beverage.
1) Challenge Question: "How is it that he should increased iced tea orders from distributor?"
Answer: He is trying to say that he sold more iced-teas than colas so he should rebalance.
How do I strengthen this supporting leg?
--- help answer / explain exactly how iced teas sold more..
(C) gives us information that can let us show that iced tea sold more. What information did it give? That they were equally stocked in the beginning, and iced tea my have had even more in stock than cola yet it depleted more than cola. The "at least" equal stocking helps us get the information and lead us to conclude that more iced teas were sold. This helps strengthen argument by better clarifying our support leg.