Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 24 Oct 2014, 11:19

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Location: Alberta, Canada
Schools: Queen's E-MBA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [1] , given: 7

A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 07 Feb 2010, 14:27
1
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

54% (02:10) correct 46% (01:28) wrong based on 652 sessions
A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its canned tuna. Last year Dietz sold 12 million cans of tuna compared to the 10 million sold during the previous year, an increase directly attributable to new customers brought in by the campaign. Profits from the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Sales of canned tuna account for a relatively small percentage of Dietz Foods' profits.
(B) Most of the people who bought Dietz's canned tuna for the first time as a result of the campaign were already loyal customers of other Dietz products.
(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.
(D) Dietz made money on sales of canned tuna last year.
(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of canned tuna.

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 34
Page: 39
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________



Please give KUDOS if you like the post

Kaplan Promo CodeKnewton GMAT Discount CodesVeritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes
1 KUDOS received
GMAT Instructor
avatar
Joined: 04 Jul 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: Madrid
Followers: 23

Kudos [?]: 132 [1] , given: 0

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 07 Feb 2010, 14:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
That a profit was made on tuna last year is beside the point. After all, it may well be that profits would have been higher without the campaign.

E is correct because it indicates that sales of tuna last year would likely have been much less than 10 million units had it not been for the campaign
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Location: Alberta, Canada
Schools: Queen's E-MBA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 7

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 07 Feb 2010, 16:09
kevincan wrote:
E is correct because it indicates that sales of tuna last year would likely have been much less than 10 million units had it not been for the campaign


But the conclusion says the campaign did nothing to improve Dietz's economic interest. How does industry wide decline of Tuna sales weaken the line of argument?
5 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 210
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 71 [5] , given: 1

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 07 Feb 2010, 20:28
5
This post received
KUDOS
siddhartho wrote:
kevincan wrote:
E is correct because it indicates that sales of tuna last year would likely have been much less than 10 million units had it not been for the campaign


But the conclusion says the campaign did nothing to improve Dietz's economic interest. How does industry wide decline of Tuna sales weaken the line of argument?


D really says that the company made money .. it is no where indicated that the company is under loss in the past.

E says that there is industry-wide decine in sales but this campaign actually allowed the sales to increase - which says that the campain is successful and aided selling more tuna and thereby in the companys economic interest.

E
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Location: Alberta, Canada
Schools: Queen's E-MBA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 7

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 07 Feb 2010, 20:32
Gotcha....thanks!
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 658
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 51

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 29 Apr 2011, 07:47
sales of tuna last year would likely have been much less than 10 million units had it not been for the campaign

concisely put . hence E
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 467
Location: Texas
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 20

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 07 May 2011, 15:04
chix475ntu wrote:

E says that there is industry-wide decine in sales but this campaign actually allowed the sales to increase - which says that the campain is successful and aided selling more tuna and thereby in the companys economic interest.

E


good explanation..
VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1364
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 10

Re: Dietz Foods [#permalink] New post 09 May 2011, 20:57
E clearly shows that because of Ad campaign the sales increased in times of industry wide decline in sales.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Posts: 49
Location: Sydney
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 7

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 09 Jul 2012, 03:58
Can someone please explain why C is incorrect?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Posts: 41
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 3

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 07 Aug 2012, 21:44
i went for C..can someone explain why is C incorrect
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 564
Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 144 [1] , given: 75

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 08 Aug 2012, 05:06
1
This post received
KUDOS
@Mohit and Dynamao

(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.

It tells up about the cause and effect;
expensive campaign --->more number of customers
less expensive campaign----> fewer number of customers

This may or may not be an obvious relationship.Better can be taken as an additional premise.
but we need an AC which can weaken the argument;(E) has it because it says that there was industry wise decline of tuna but somehow the campaign helped to acquire more customers though the profit was not very good.

Hope this helps !
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Current Student
avatar
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 326
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 138 [0], given: 26

Premium Member
Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 13 Aug 2012, 09:32
MohitGarg wrote:
i went for C..can someone explain why is C incorrect



Well C states that

A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year

Even if the less expensive campaign would have bought few customers one cannot comment whether those fewer customers would harm or do go good to the sales , its possible that fewer customers lets say 100 new customers that the less expensive one bought actually are responsible for the entire incremental sales then there is no harm to Dietz economic interest so C is discarded.
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 5
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 1

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 23 Oct 2012, 20:53
Does industry-wide mean every company company in the industry?
Because, if it does not then (E) is questionable. Since, Dietz Foods could have been an out-performer in the industry increasing sales Y-O-Y by more than 20%. But when the ad. campaign was launched it resulted in just 20% of increase in sales which is less than the more than 20% growth it was seeing earlier.

Please clarify, industry-wide?

Thank you.
2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 34
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT Date: 11-08-2012
GPA: 2.67
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 25 [2] , given: 4

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 24 Oct 2012, 00:30
2
This post received
KUDOS
TheUntouchable wrote:
Does industry-wide mean every company company in the industry?
Because, if it does not then (E) is questionable. Since, Dietz Foods could have been an out-performer in the industry increasing sales Y-O-Y by more than 20%. But when the ad. campaign was launched it resulted in just 20% of increase in sales which is less than the more than 20% growth it was seeing earlier.

Please clarify, industry-wide?

Thank you.


In critical reasoning questions, especially these kind of questions, there is generally no one correct answer. There is a best answer and there are less than best answers; we need to pick up the best one.

You are right that generally, industry wide phenomenon need not necessarily mean that each and every company is going through that. So, when we say that airline industry is facing severe losses due to intense competition among the players, we don't really mean that every airline company is facing losses; there could be some companies who would be making profits. What we mean is that the industry, as a whole, is in red (or in other words, if we combine the profit figures of all airlines, we would have a negative figure).

However, in this question, we have to assume that Dietz food was not an outlier in the industry because of two reasons:
1. There is nothing given to suggest this
2. If we assume this, this option loses its relevance and there are no other sensible options to weaken the argument at hand. So, to have a solution, we need to avoid such assumptions, which are based more on our real life experience than the understanding of the question.

My second reason may sound a bit strange but let's assume one of the options was:

Before last year, the company had gone through five years of continuous sales decline of its canned tuna.

Now, which one would you select? I would select this option now, since this is more specific and makes almost no assumptions about the performance of the company vis-a-vis industry, unlike option E. So, in this case, you can reject E saying that it makes such assumptions but not in the original question given.

Generally, the more an option relies on assumptions, weaker the option is (in both strengthen and weaken types of questions) and has lower chance of being the answer. However, if there is no other option even related to the argument at hand, then even this weaker option can be the answer.

PS: If you think C could have been the answer, then look again into it. It used unclear words two times within one sentence: "less expensive" - how much less - 10%, 20%, 90%?; "significantly fewer new customers" - how few - 60% less, 90%, 99%? The statement is too weak to be an answer.
_________________

If this post is helpful, think of giving KUDOS.

Expert Post
3 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1794
Followers: 1299

Kudos [?]: 3677 [3] , given: 185

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 26 Oct 2012, 16:29
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Before we get to the logic of this question, lets understand the role a weakener should play:

A weakener decreases your belief in the conclusion. This means, that after reading the correct weakener choice and one should say that "I do not believe as strongly in the conclusion now" . Note, a weakener does not have to disprove the conclusion.

Lets now see the argument in the light of the above principle. We will first focus on the conclusion:

Conclusion: Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests.

What does the conclusion mean: Considering that economic interests == profits, either short term or long term, the conclusion implies that the advertising campaign did not contribute to either.
Why does the author say this: The author makes this statement because the cost of the campaign is higher than the incremental sales (2 million cans), allegedly because of the campaign.

What could be some weakeners:
There could be two potential ways to weaken this argument:
1. If an answer choice projects the possibility that the campaign may have contributed for more than 2 million cans of sales.
2. If an answer choice projects the possibility that the new customers would become repeat customers; i.e. they would bring more sales in the future. Note this again means that the benefit from the campaign would be greater than the 2 million cans.

Choice E

1. Choice E projects the possibility that the campaign may have contributed for more than 2 million cans of sales. Hence is the correct choice.

Choice C


Choice C is actually completely irrelevant. lets look at choice C to understand why:
Quote:
A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.


This is talking about a completely different campaign. It has nothing to do with whether the current campaign contributed to furthering Dietz's economic interests.

TakeAway: A weakener provides new information, which in the light of the information presented in the argument, reduces your belief in the conclusion. Secondly, a majority (95%+) of Weaken Questions have only one weakener.

-Rajat
_________________

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeT9_Wr0DlI&feature=youtu.be

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 454
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 39

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 03 Dec 2012, 09:06
why B is wrong?

B said the the first customers are become the loyal customer who buy in the future. This increase the belief that economic interest appear in the future. B is also a correct one.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 454
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 39

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 03 Dec 2012, 20:27
TakeAway: A weakener provides new information, which in the light of the information presented in the argument, reduces your belief in the conclusion. Secondly, a majority (95%+) of Weaken Questions have only one weakener.


Rajat, your above sentence is good. but I am not sure to understand you correctly. The following question from og 10 ilustrates the above sentence

- Manufacturers of mechanical pencils make most of the profit on pencil leads rather than on the pencils themselves. The Write Company, which cannot sell its leads as cheaply as other manufacturers can, plans to alter the design of its mechanical pencil so that it will accept only a new designed Write Company lead, which will be sold at the same price as the Write Company's current lead.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the Write Company's projection that its plan will lead to an increase in its sales of pencil leads?


(A) First-time buyers of mechanical pencils tend to buy the least expensive mechanical pencils available.

(B) Annual sales of mechanical pencils are expected to triple over the next five years.

(C) A Write Company executive is studyiing ways to reduce the cost of manufacturing pencil leads.

(D) A rival manufacturer recently announced similar plans to introduce a mechanical pencil that would accept only the leads produced by that manufacturer.

(E) In extensive test marketing, mechanical-pencil users found the new Write Company pencil markedly superior to other mechanical pencils they had used.


in this problem B is considered "not in the light of the information presented in the argument" and is wrong. E is considered "in the light of information presented in the argument" and is correct.

is that what you mean, Rajat?, pls confirm this point.

can I say that the weakener/strengthener is information which increases doubt/belief that the evidence will make the conclusion, not the information which increase doubt/belief that the conclusion will happen independently from the evidence.

is my thinking correct here? pls confirm.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 914
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 239 [0], given: 318

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 12 Dec 2012, 21:51
ExecMBA2010 wrote:
A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its canned tuna. Last year Dietz sold 12 million cans of tuna compared to the 10 million sold during the previous year, an increase directly attributable to new customers brought in by the campaign. Profits from the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Sales of canned tuna account for a relatively small percentage of Dietz Foods' profits.
(B) Most of the people who bought Dietz's canned tuna for the first time as a result of the campaign were already loyal customers of other Dietz products.
(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.
(D) Dietz made money on sales of canned tuna last year.
(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of canned tuna.

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 34
Page: 39
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:


Why not answer can be (B). as it states that "MOST" people who bought for the first time as a result of "CAM" and they were already loyal to other products and will be loyal to this one also(Well that is not an assumption !!!!!)

Although (E) can also be the answer as it => that sales are far more than 2 million => that proportionate increase in old profits which matched = "CAM" costs

Experts Plz pour in !!!
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2013
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 10 Aug 2013, 13:56
I am still confused about this question. By "economic interests" I would assume it means money. I understand that the campaign lead to 2 million or more cans of tuna being sold. But, if the profits of the additional cans were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign, how can it be said that the campaign furthered Dietz's economic interests. Please explain.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 838
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Followers: 37

Kudos [?]: 614 [0], given: 197

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising [#permalink] New post 10 Aug 2013, 14:20
xmizer wrote:
I am still confused about this question. By "economic interests" I would assume it means money. I understand that the campaign lead to 2 million or more cans of tuna being sold. But, if the profits of the additional cans were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign, how can it be said that the campaign furthered Dietz's economic interests. Please explain.


lets take 5 years as 1 2 3 4 5
year 1 =30 tuna sold
year 2 =25 tuna sold
year 3 =20 tuna sold
year 4 =15 tuna sold
year 5 =10 tuna sold
now advertising campaigncame
year 6 =12 tuna sold
since tuna selling was on a steep(was decreasing ) so increase in 2 tuna dont you think furthered economically.
hope it helps

let me know if you have doubt.
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...



GMAT RCs VOCABULARY LIST: vocabulary-list-for-gmat-reading-comprehension-155228.html
learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... assessment
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APt9ITygGss

Re: A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising   [#permalink] 10 Aug 2013, 14:20
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 This past year, Jack's Packaged Goods launched a yearlong elegan 1 02 Nov 2012, 22:35
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic CR Twenty years ago. Vavali 14 29 Mar 2008, 13:34
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were Swagatalakshmi 13 28 Feb 2007, 23:57
1 Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were joemama142000 22 24 Apr 2006, 05:31
10 years ago, Samuel was twice as old as Hui. 10 years ago, rahulraao 2 12 Oct 2005, 19:48
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 31 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.