A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool compan

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management 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?



Let’s understand the structure of the argument given-

Prominent investor’s opinion/conclusion- the company is mismanaged,

Reasons/evidence/premise- citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products.

Author’s opinion/ conclusion- It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case, it is clearly not justified.

Reasons/ premises- 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.


The first BF is the conclusion of the investor that the author disagrees with. The second BF is the conclusion of the author.

Let’s scan the options and eliminate all the options that do not follow this structure.

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.
The second BF is not evidence but the conclusion of the author. Eliminate

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.
Same as A.

C. The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
Both are correct.

D. The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.
The first BF is not evidence but the conclusion/main position of the investor. Eliminate.

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.
Same as D. Eliminate.


Option C is correct.


Vishnupriya
GMAT Verbal SME

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.--- The first statement is correct, but the second statement is not an evidence.

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.--- Same as A. Second statement is not evidence.

C The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.--- CORRECT.

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.--- The first is not an evidence but just something the investor claims.

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.---- The first statement is not an evidence but this what the investor claims.

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management 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 support 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.

GMATNinjaTwo Could you help to assist to analyse this question? Does the word "clearly" is a hint for the conclusion? Perhaps you could provide the explanations for the transition word in this argument. I have a hard time to identify the conclusion of the argument. Thank you.

Here's the argument, rearranged somewhat:

• There has been a recent rise in Burton's inventory of finished products.
• An increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand.
• But, in Burton's case, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.
• This implies that Burton's production is NOT outstripping demand and that there is no reason to slow production. This undermines the evidence cited by the investor, in support of the investor's position that the company is mismanaged.
• Therefore, the investor's criticism of management is clearly not justified (conclusion).

The first boldfaced section, "the company is mismanaged", is the position of the prominent investor, not evidence to support the investor's position. The evidence cited to support that position is "the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products", and this portion is not boldfaced.

The second boldfaced section, "in this case [the investor's sniping at management] is clearly not justified", does not undermine the evidence cited above ("the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products"). Stating that the investor's sniping was not justified does not, by itself, undermine the evidence. Rather, the second portion is the conclusion of the author's argument.

Thus, choice (C) accurately expresses the roles of the two boldfaced portions.

Oops - I answered the wrong question!

Investor (opposing) argument: premise: company didn't react to increased inventory -> company mismanaged
Main Argument: Premise: increase in inventory = for existing orders -> company didn't need to pull back production -> investor's claim isn't justified

The tricky thing here is that mid-way it sounds like there's a larger theme being presented that investor's gripes aren't productive, which can sound like the argument's main position. HOWEVER, by mapping out what the supporting evidence all points towards, you realize that the main claim is actually why the company isn't mismanaged.

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. the first does state the position the argument opposes, the second is the main position though, not evidence -> eliminate

(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. the first does that; the second does not provide evidence to support the 1st, if anything it opposes the first

(C) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole. the first does that; the second is the conclusion -> WINNER

(D) The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence. the first is the position, the second claims the first is wrong, but the following statements are the 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. the first is the position not the evidence, the second does what it says

Some quick pre-thinking. The investor is thinking company is mismanaged as there is a build of of inventory. The author however thinks this is not true, as stated in the passage "Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers."


(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. Yes it is a position taken; No it is not evidence, rather the author's take on the situation

(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. Yes; No not evidence

(C) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole. Yes, Yes the author's take = the author's conclusion

(D) The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence. No, No it is just a position taken, not information to undermine

(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. No not evidence; Yes it is

Bunuel
Highlighted part says: this question is also from ''gmatprep''. If this is right, the question of the above link should be under ''gmatprep'' tag.

GMATNinja
Sir,
By the word that in choice D, it indicates the first bold part (position/conclusion of the investor). So, i think, we should NOT care about what is going on the highlighted part (though the highlighted part is the EVIDENCE). Am I missing anything?
Thanks__

I'm not exactly sure what you mean with regard to our previous explanation, but I can say that analyzing the role of the word "that" in this answer choice isn't necessary for us to eliminate choice (D).

We know that the 1st BF portion is NOT evidence. It is the position of the prominent investor.

We also know that the 2nd BF portion does NOT undermine evidence. It is the conclusion of the author.

Choice (D) misrepresents both BF portions on their own, so we can eliminate the entire answer choice based on either of those misrepresentations.

I hope that helps!

Dear VeritasKarishma AjiteshArun GMATGuruNY IanStewart MartyTargetTestPrep DmitryFarber,

I have some question on the meaning of the highlighted portion before the 2nd BF:


The highlighted portion means the author thinks "an investor's sniping at management" is "counterproductive" right?
This sentence is a little bit confusing because of the double-negative -- i.e., "doubtful" and "anything other than"

Hi varotkorn,

You are right about this. The highlighted portion tells us that (I'm ignoring the doubtful bit here) the author thinks that an investor's sniping at management is counterproductive.

Hi all, can anyone simplfying the meaning of

"As a whole opposes" ? the argument opposes?

THank you

Hi, I was wondering with questions like this, where there is more than 1 Conclusion, would the Author's conclusion always be considered the "main conclusion" of the passage, unless otherwise specifically stated in the question?

Also, is it common to see questions (Boldface or say find the conclusion questions), where we could be asked to find the other party's conclusion (relative to the author)?

The author is the person writing the passage, so yes -- his/her conclusion is generally the main point of the passage as a whole.

Boldface questions can ask about any piece of the passage, and it's not uncommon for another party's conclusion (or support for that conclusion) to pop up. Because there are so many different roles a given piece of the passage can play, it's best to break down the structure of the entire argument, and THEN focus on why the author included each BF.

If you want to suffer through a full hour on boldface CR questions, here's a video.

I hope that helps!

VeritasKarishma GMATNinja -

Hi Experts - My question is on the structure of the sentence (not on the answer choice)

It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified

The yellow highlight can be reworded to say -- Sniping is always counter-productive

The word after is "BUT" which should change the direction of what comes next (maybe Sniping is Good in this case?)

BF 2 then states -- Sniping is NOT justified in this case

I think the word "BUT" [indicating change in direction] should be replaced with "And", specifically "and in this case, sniping is not justified"

The word "BUT" seems to be misplaced according to me because "BUT" indicates what comes in BF 2 should be directionally opposite to what is said in the yellow highlight

Please let me know your thoughts with regards to the word "BUT" specifically as i think it should be "And in this case ....."

Here, "but" gives the contrast between "doubtful" and "clearly".

It is doubtful whether A can ever be productive ... but in this case, it is clearly not justified.