At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 10 Dec 2016, 17:58

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 56
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 91 [0], given: 0

At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2008, 17:25
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (00:00) correct 50% (01:03) wrong based on 3 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced soem of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

Q: The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

A) some celebrities come to the hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available
B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the hollywood compensates for the longer itme, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
C) a customer of the hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering
D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all of the hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables
If you have any questions
New!
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 985 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2008, 18:58
quiet888 wrote:
At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced soem of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

Q: The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

A) some celebrities come to the hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available
B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the hollywood compensates for the longer itme, if any, they spend lingering over their meals
C) a customer of the hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering
D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all of the hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables

Dont understand why you make a boldface of B choice?
I choose B with the following reason:

The argument claims that "soem of its seating with high tables and stools" is resposible for the profit increase of restaurant.

This claim will be vulnerable if you find out another cause that make profit of the restaurant increase. So B win
_________________
Director
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 555
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2008, 19:08
no clue..still thinking..
Director
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 513
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2008, 19:14
IMO E is correct. As too many tall tables means that people sitting behind wont get a view of the celebrities.
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 985 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2008, 19:23
saravalli wrote:
no clue..still thinking..

You must be kidding!

Let start from: Because...Howerver, for the kind of argument includes "moreover", you should pay special attention to "the thing after Moreover". I hope you get the point. That is from where the argument come and go to its conclusion: "if seating on stools and high tables, the customers will not stay long. And the length of seating is claimed to be the killer of increase in profit of restaurant.

So, Flaw (or vulnerable) of this argument is causality, if you find another cause, for example price as B says, of increase in profit, this argument is vulnerable.

_________________
Manager
Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 56
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 91 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2008, 02:57
OA is C. Though still could not conclusively understand why.
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2007
Posts: 59
Location: United Kingdom
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2008, 03:28
A difficult one .I initially chosen D .The question is discussed nicely in below post
11-t46233
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 985 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2008, 20:56
quiet888 wrote:
OA is C. Though still could not conclusively understand why.

I will come back to help you clear soon. I hate my wifi. It stops and delete all my writting in 5 minutes only to make clear this. My god!
_________________
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 985 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2008, 22:51
I come back!

The reasoning I post in previous one is correct.

Let start from: Because...

Howerver, for the kind of argument includes "moreover", you should pay special attention to "the thing after Moreover". I hope you get the point. That is from where the argument come and go to its conclusion: "if seating on stools and high tables, the customers will not stay long. And the length of seating is claimed to be the responsibility of increase in profit of restaurant.

Tips:
When you see the argument that has a conditional conclusion, and a FLAW question. You should attack the neseccary condition to show that the necessary condition does not need to occur in order for the sufficient condition to occur.

Application:
How do you show that "replacing some tall stables and stools does not lead to the increase in profit. Now matter what the replacing is preferable by the author.

You should show that depending on customers, not on stables and stools, as C say. Or The customers does not follow the generational rule as the author point out.
_________________
Director
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 500
Location: Eastern Europe
Schools: Oxford
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 221 [0], given: 4

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2008, 13:04
I remember well that OA is C but I never understood this q completely… So I’ve tried to examine it closer (at last).

Quote:
At present the hollywood restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that_________?

What is asked? To find an assumption and show what will happen if this assumption is not true. (a sort of ‘weaken’ question)

Let’s have a look at argument structure:
Premise 1: many Hollywood customers like to watch the celebrities and thus like high stools
Premise 2: dinners at high stools usually took less time (overall, but we don’t know whether it will be true for Hollywood!)
Assumption: dinners at high stools at Hollywood will take less time (i.e., the general rule will apply in this particular case)
Intermediate conclusion: less time per customer means increased customers rotation and thus higher profits (again, overall. Whether it will be true for Hollywood, depends on assumption above)
Conclusion: if we replace some of usual stools with high stools, Hollywood profits will increase

So, the negation of argument’s assumption would mean something like:
‘people at high stools in Hollywood will spend at least as much time at their dinners as people at usual ones’ – i.e., the general rule stated in Premise 2 won’t be true for the particular case. In such a situation, replacing the usual stools will high ones won’t bring any additional profit.

Now, time to check the answers:

A) some celebrities come to the hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available (says nothing about profits increase)
B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the hollywood compensates for the longer itme, if any, they spend lingering over their meals (says nothing about profits increase since potential profits from customers aren't mentioned)
C) a customer of the hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering (yes, it is the only answer choice that negates the assumption – namely, C says that the general rule stated in Premise 2 won’t be true in the case of Hollywood)
D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer (argument does not deny this possibility, but it implies that this lose could be compensated by the increased number of customers)
E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all of the hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables (who cares what they will really see if there’s enough profit?)
Director
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 648
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 500 [0], given: 6

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2008, 23:19
Nice explanation...went with D while I took the test under timed test. Isn't it tricky to analyze between C and D in exam?
_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space

Re: CR - Hollywood restaurant   [#permalink] 26 Jul 2008, 23:19
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 #Top150 CR: At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard 2 28 Dec 2015, 00:00
7 #Top150 CR: At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard 2 05 Oct 2015, 20:49
8 At present the Hollywood Restaurant has 6 10 Nov 2014, 14:47
61 At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height 18 14 Sep 2012, 22:50
At present, the Hollywood restaurant has only standard 29 28 May 2007, 05:16
Display posts from previous: Sort by