Analyst: The pace of technological development brings a constant strea

Dear ConnectTheDots,
I'm happy to respond to your p.m.

The OA to this question is (B). This is a very well-written question, as MGMAT questions typically are.

The prompt discusses a problem --- if the arrival of the new technology is announced too soon, while sales of the old product are high, it will cut into those sales. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Company X is selling a device in version 3.0, and at the beginning of July, they will be able to launch the sale of version 4.0. When should they announce that 4.0 is on the way? It doesn't matter for sales of 4.0 --- starting in July, they will make a ton of money on 4.0. But they also want to maximize their sales from now until July, the sales of 3.0, and if they announce right away that 4.0 is coming, most people will no longer be interested in buying 3.0. An early announcement will make their pre-July sales decline.

That's the problem. The prompt is mostly about clarifying this problem. The only recommendation is the weak statement: don't announce too early: "wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline."

Now, what does (B) say?
(B) Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
If this is true, this would amplify the problem. If Company X makes an early announcement, and immediately the media broadcasts this announcement to the four corners of the earth, all while sales of the old device were still high, then this would make the problem more pronounced. This absolutely makes clear why it would be such a spectacularly bad idea for Company X to make their announcement too early. The analyst was taking about a problem, and choice (B) makes clear: yes, it's a big problem. If the company announce too early, the media will amplify it, and sales of the old technology will plummet. That's a big problem. This makes it even more clear --- the company should not make the announcement, so sales of the old product don't decline prematurely. In that sense, (B) is very strong support --- it confirms that there is a big problem here, that the analyst is addressing.

Does this make sense?
Mike

Premises:
Tech development brings new devices and many of them enjoy commercial success.
But if consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one successfully currently on sale.

Conclusion: If a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Conclusion is about the company not announcing the new device.


A. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
How does the reduction in price affect the company, we don't know. Do the revenues increase because more people buy cheaper product or is it better to introduce new product at this time to have better revenues later (if people defer buying now), we don't know. So we cannot say whether its good for the company to announce or not announce the new tech.

B. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
This is a reason why companies should not announce a new product while sale of old ones is still strong. The media houses will report about the new product to the public while the sales of old devices are still strong and people may stop buying. It strengthens our conclusion that the company should not announce new tech too soon.

C. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
We just know that consumers often hold on for new tech. Why they do that is irrelevant. If they are unable to determine the superiority, it is probably not because of quality that they defer their purchase. In any case, it doesn't impact our conclusion that companies should not announce new products too soon.

D. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
This just says that there are all kind of consumers - frequent buyers as well as seldom buyers. This doesn't impact our conclusion.

E. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.
Again, just goes to show that companies have their loyalists. This doesn't impact our conclusion.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The conclusion is that a company should wait until purchases of an old device have begun to decline before announcing a new device. The basis for this claim is that consumers stop buying the old device. We are asked to strengthen the argument.

(A) The typical drop in the price of new technology does not influence whether a company should wait until sales of an old technology begin to decline before introducing a new one.

(B) CORRECT. This choice states that media outlets such as television and magazines often report on the planned introduction of new devices while sales of old devices are still strong. The argument requires that consumers "hear about the new device"; stories in the media provide a means for consumers to do so.

(C) If many consumers are unable to determine the superiority of new technology, then they might be less swayed to wait for a new, recently announced device than otherwise. As a result, this claim may be seen to weaken the analyst's assertion.

(D) The number of technology purchases per year does not directly relate to this argument. The argument is about waiting until the consumer demand declines before announcing a new technology. However frequently consumers typically purchase technology, some will be ready to buy the old device when news of the upcoming device gets out -- and according to the argument, this news will cause some of those consumers to wait.

(E) The passage makes no mention of whether the technologies belong to the same company or different companies.

Premis 1: The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success.
Premis 2:But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire.
Premis 3: Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale.
Conclusion: So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?

New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales. -- even the prices decline the sale might keep its pace with larger quantities sold so doesnt support the assertion

Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong. - this one supports the assertion and gives example.

Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology. - nothing to do with commercialization

Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases. - out of scope

Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using. -- no even they are loayal. there is no guarantee that they buy two of the same device one with upgraded features.

OA is B

But even knowing OE, I do not still feel confident

OE:
The conclusion is that a company should wait until purchases of an old device have begun to decline before announcing a new device. The basis for this claim is that consumers stop buying the old device. We are asked to strengthen the argument.

(A) The typical drop in the price of new technology does not influence whether a company should wait until sales of an old technology begin to decline before introducing a new one.

(B) CORRECT. This choice states that media outlets such as television and magazines often report on the planned introduction of new devices while sales of old devices are still strong. The argument requires that consumers "hear about the new device"; stories in the media provide a means for consumers to do so.

(C) If many consumers are unable to determine the superiority of new technology, then they might be less swayed to wait for a new, recently announced device than otherwise. As a result, this claim may be seen to weaken the analyst's assertion.

(D) The number of technology purchases per year does not directly relate to this argument. The argument is about waiting until the consumer demand declines before announcing a new technology. However frequently consumers typically purchase technology, some will be ready to buy the old device when news of the upcoming device gets out -- and according to the argument, this news will cause some of those consumers to wait.

(E) The passage makes no mention of whether the technologies belong to the same company or different companies.

Tricky question.

Only B suffice by PoE, but still its two parts are not in sync as per the conclusion - So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Rest are out of scope.

Guys, look at B like this - B is trying to state that media outlets help in passing a company's announcement of a new technology to the masses and they often do so when the old devices are still on sale. From this I know that if a company desires to announce upcoming sales of a new device - it will surely reach the masses and hence become detrimental to the sales of older products. Hence, we have support for the analysts main point that the company "should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline."

Hope this helps.

Much thanks in advance:

Question:

Analyst: The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success. But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire. Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale. So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?

A. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.

B. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.

C. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.

D. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.

E. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.


--------------------------------------


The answer is B.

I understand this is a strengthen the argument question. But I would think that because media outlets often report about new devices even if sales are going strong, then regardless if the company waits until sales of old technology has declined, the plan might still backfire because media outlets will have already posted about the new technology. That if anything weakens the argument to me.

Can someone explain why B is the right answer?

Thank you.

Analyst: if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?

A. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
--> no talk of technology getting less or more expensive its just the decline or surge of sales, hence its out of scope.

B. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
--> only relevant option strengthening that conclusion could stand because as per B the information is provided and hence the trend is observed

C. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
--> it is irrelevant. even if one say its affecting then thats:weakening.

D. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
--> nature of purchases is out of scope

E. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.
-->okay its totally irrelevant

Premise 1) The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success.
Premise 2)But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire. Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale.

Conclusion:So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Well its a good example with respect to iphone series of cell phones. I hoe the guys at apple would also be following the same strategy.

Since, the author said once consumers hear about new technology, they might opt for newer one rather the old technology. The conclusion states unless the sales of products are not declining ,advertisement of new prods. should not be done.
A casual relation ship can be established as follows:

New product announcement ---leads to----> decline in sale of old product.
advertisement -------lead to---->announcement of new product.
advertisement-------lead to------> decline in sale of old product.

The argument is to hold the advertisement till the sales of old product starts to decline.

My reasoning-

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?

a) New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.--well broadly speaking it will deline the sales of old products but it has nothing to do with the advertisement.Out of scope ans.

b) Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.--This is what causal relation ship tells us, that advertisement will lead to decline in old product sales, hence, it justifies the authors conclusion that advertisement should not be done till sales start to decline.

c) Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.-Irrelevant

d) Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.-This again does not affects the argument in any way.(some may be buying more or some may be buying less but no mention of old or new products)

e) Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.(this points out that sales wont be affected by competition) irrelevant.

This is one of the most difficult question I've ever seen. I just went for B by using POE. I saw many a ton of great solutions for this question, I just want to clarify a little bit though.

Premise: people stop buying old products if there's an announcement of new products.
Conclusion: a company should delay the announcement until the sale of old products is declined.
Assumption: the announcement can affect purchasing behavior of many people. if this assumption is not hold, the conclusion is broken.

The answer B is indirect assumption. It says media outlets often report new products while the sales of old products are still strong. It implies that media outlets report --> people know NEW product is coming--> sales of OLD ones will be declined sooner or later. That's exactly the assumption mentioned above.

Still not clear? No problem.

Other way to understand the logic. We can use negation technique. Let negate the logic above: media outlets report NEW products --> People NOT know --> sales of OLD products will NOT be declined. Hey, what's going on? it means the announcement of NEW product does not affect the sale of OLD ones. So the company can announce its new products whenever it wants. Timing doesn't matter. Hence, the conclusion is failed.

Hi distressedDamsel

I'm glad to help.

First of all, this question is not easy, because you may not determine a CORRECT CONCLUSION. Please keep in mind, conclusion is KEY to solve strengthen/weaken questions. Let imagine, if you don't know what the author wants to conclude, how could you weaken or strengthen his/her point.


ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

Fact: Technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market. Many of them enjoy commercial success.
Fact: Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale.
Conclusion: Announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire.

Never assume conclusions are ALWAYS the first or last sentences. Like this question, if you think the last sentence - "So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline" - is the main conclusion, you will pick the wrong answer.

The main point you should strengthen is: Announcing new technology too soon ==> can get backfire


ANALYZE EACH ANSWER:

(A) New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
Wrong. Does it help you to explain why "announcing new tech too soon will get backfire". Not at all, it just tells you the FACT: after new tech gets peak --> prices will decline, that's it.

(B) Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
Correct. "B" helps you strengthen the main point "announcing new tech too soon --> get back fire". The KEY is "Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale". How can they hear?. Consumers will hear through Media outlets => Media outlets indirectly stop the sales of current products".

(C) Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
Wrong. Out of scope. The argument does not talk about which technology is more superior.

(D) Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
Wrong. Does not help. The Fact: consumers make only 1 or 2 purchases does not affect the main point at all.

(E) Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.
Wrong. Out of scope. Nothing about "loyalty".

Hope it helps.

Hey all, just wanted to let you know I chose (E) for the following reason.
We are being told that if a tech company announces a product too son it can back fire because customers would stop buying the new product. Having said that, the author says that a better plan might be to wait until they decline.

Now after reading this, use your common sense. For example, think of an Apple or a Samsung, you name it.
Now, why do these guys don't follow this strategy? Why do they "canibalize" to some extent some of their old devices when they launch every year or so new devices constantly. Wouldn't it be better to let the demand start to decline to then throw a new Iphone or Galaxy and then boost their sales?

The reason why they do it, is because if they don't another competitor will and will take customers away from them. Ok ok, I understand that we should stick to the stimulus and not make real life inferences, but it makes sense doesn't it?

Let's analyze other answer choices shall we?

A. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales. Out of scope
B. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong. Ok media outlets do it, but are tech companies similar to media outlets including television programs and magazines? We can't assume that

C. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology. Hmm, let me think about this one for a minute. This in fact weakens it. If they are unaware then there is no reason to wait. They won't really care, they will just buy anything!

D. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases. Some do, some don't. This lacks substance
E. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using. I think this is it. If they are loyal then you can wait until demand declines and just then throw something big out there for customer to buy again and again and again..

Happy to share some thoughts with experts. Would be nice also if a MGMAT tutor explains this one
Thank you all very much in advance
Cheers
J

I love such questions where you are convinced the answer is North while the OA says it's South. These questions make us sit up and pay attention and in the process learn something new.
Like you I too thought the answer was E, it surely supports the assumption, but does the question stem asks us to support the assumption or assertion ?

When the term assertion struck me I turned to Google to find the difference between Assumption and Assertion and surely there was a very subtle difference.

Assertion - Assert implies stating confidently without need for proof or regard for evidence, implies conviction based on experience, faith and evidence

Assumption- fact or statement (unstated) taken for granted or accepted as true without proof, based on feeling

Now if this was a support the Assumption question the answer would have been E. But since this is a support the Assertion question let us find out what is the Analyst's main assertion.

So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.
This states that companies must change the present trend which is to announce a new device while the sale of old device is still going strong.

From the above analysis we can see B is a clear winner as it states the current trend.


WOW !!! today was a success, I actually learned something

Dear dina98,
I'm happy to respond. Remember, my friend, that there are many ways to strengthen and support an argument. Here's the question again:
Analyst: The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success. But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire. Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale. So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?

(A) New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
(B) Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
(C) Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
(D) Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
(E) Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.

So, the analyst describes a problem and proposes a solution to the problem. Choice (B) doesn't really say anything about the solution that the analyst proposed, but it definitely amplifies the problem described. We want something that supports "the analyst's main assertion." What is the analysts main assertion? Well, the analyst spend two sentence describing the problem and only one describing the solution, so the existence of the problem seems to be the analyst's main assertion. Main assertion = problem exists, and (B) makes very clear why it's a problem.

Remember that the speaker's main point is not always the final line of the argument. It is not always the case that, in a strengthener, you are automatically strengthening the last line only. See this blog.
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-cr-st ... -argument/

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Dear Dina98,
I'm happy to respond. My friend, this is the very difficult thing about GMAT CR: none of it is formulaic. In each GMAT CR question, you have to think critically about how things are related, and sometimes that's not obvious. This is always true in official questions, and here, MGMAT has written a very good one, as they often do.

Think carefully about the problem. Old device is selling well. New device is introduced, and thereby cuts into the sales of the old device. That's the core problem that the analyst raises. The analyst is arguing that this is really a problem.

Any fact that made the situation better would cast doubt on whether this so-called problem is really a problem. That would be a weakener. By contrast, any fact that makes the situation worse would leave no doubt that this problem really is a problem. That would be a strengthener.

Now, here's (B):
(B) Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
Think about this. Suppose the sales of the old device are still strong. Suppose the company foolishly launches the new device. Of course, of course, the media is going to be all over the newest and latest gadget. Media is doing nothing wrong: they are simply doing what they do. Notice, though, that this wildly enhances the problem. If we lived in some different world in which the media paid no attention to hot new devices, then maybe it would take folks a long time to discover the new device, and in the interim, sales of the old device could proceed unaffected. BUT, in our world, media jumps all over something new, so virtually as soon as the company releases the new device, everyone who doesn't live under a rock is made aware of the existence of this hot new device, and of course that popularity and attention drives sales of the new device, which adversely affect sales of the old device.

(B) by itself is not a problem at all. It's a purely factual statement. BUT, given the nature of the problem, (B) strongly enhances the problem. In other words, the analyst says that there's really a problem, and (B) strengthens that assertion.

This is precisely the kind of thinking you have to do on the GMAT CR: critical thinking about the implications of statements, because in a good CR question, the connections will not be obvious on the surface. Correct answers on the CR often are designed to look irrelevant at first glance, and it's only when we think about all the implications that we see the connections.

This is also a CR question in which having a good sense of the business world will help you. See this blog:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2014/gmat-criti ... knowledge/

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst’s main assertion?

A. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.- Out of scope

B. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong. - Correct

C. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.- Out of scope

D. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.- Out of scope

E. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using. - Out of scope