A prominent investor who holds a large stake Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to recent rise in its inventory of finished products It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at manager can ever be anything other than counterproductive , but in this case it is clearly not justified. It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to undermine the support for the position being opposed.

B The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position being opposed.

C The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
D The first is evidence that has been used to SMPPort a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

E The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

Other type of this question exists but this is another version. Please explain in a detailed way.Nice explanation will be rewarded with kudos ) . OA after explanations.
_________________

Please give kudos if you enjoy the explanations that I have given. Thanks

I think it should be C

The first bold part as a whole mentions that investor claimed company is being mismanaged which if you read the whole para carefully is being refuted by the author.
The second bold face mentions that basically what the investor said is wrong. It continues to provide reasons why investor is wrong.

C is the best answer because 1st part provides a position with which the argument as a whole disagrees. The second bold face is on a high level the overall conclusion

What is OA?

IMO C.

The first boldface has been disproved, once you read the entire argument.

The second boldface "but in this case it is clearly not justified" does not provide any evidence, but looking at the argument as a whole, it seems to be a conclusion. Hence, C.

What's OA?

C, as first is the position that the argument opposes, the second part is the conclusion of the second part of the passage which is the argument that opposed the position.

According to GMAT Prep, it's B.

101 % C only. heh

+1 for C.