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

It is currently 30 Oct 2014, 20:03

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

Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore,

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
4 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 313
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 91 [4] , given: 20

Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, [#permalink] New post 12 Aug 2010, 22:03
4
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (02:26) correct 55% (01:21) wrong based on 185 sessions
Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, Inc., must increase productivity, 10 percent over the course of the next two years, or it will certainly go bankrupt. In fact, however, Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable.
If the statements above are true, which one of the following must on the basis of them also be true?

(A) It is only Quore’s production structure that makes it possible for Quore to survive the transformation of the market.
(B) Quore will not go bankrupt if it achieves a productivity increase of 20 percent over the next two years.
(C) If the market had not been transformed, Quore would have required no productivity increase in order to avoid bankruptcy.
(D) Because of the transformation of the market, Quore will achieve a productivity increase of 10 percent over the next two years.
(E) If a 20 percent productivity increase is unattainable for Quore, then it must go bankrupt.

The explanation given in one of the gmat thread's is:
they tell you that if it doesn't increase by 10%, it will go bankrupt. this is diagrammed as:
(1) if (not)10% -> then bankrupt.
next it says if 10% is possible, then 20% is possible. this is diagrammed as:
10% possible -> then 20% possible
next, you should always look at the converse of statements, as that will usually be the key to unlocking the problem. the converse of this statement is:

(2) if 20% not possible -> 10% not possible
now you have everything you need. if you add equation 1 to the end of equation 2, you will see that E is true:
if 20% not possible ->10 % not possible -> then bankrupt
therefore, E is the answer

But how can we deduce Point 2? if 20% is not possible then 10% may/ may not be possible !
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Kaplan GMAT Prep Discount CodesKnewton GMAT Discount CodesVeritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 226
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 11

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 12 Aug 2010, 23:43
I pick B :(

Understand now why E is correct, good explanation rohitgoel15. kudo for you.


rohitgoel15 wrote:
(2) if 20% not possible -> 10% not possible
now you have everything you need. if you add equation 1 to the end of equation 2, you will see that E is true:
if 20% not possible ->10 % not possible -> then bankrupt
therefore, E is the answer

But how can we deduce Point 2? if 20% is not possible then 10% may/ may not be possible !


If A always lead to B => If B doesn't exist A can't exist.
If Yao Minh play, the rocket always win => If the rocket doesn't win, Yao Minh must not play.

That how we deduce point 2.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 459
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 5

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 13 Aug 2010, 06:40
I myself choose B,

but after reading your explanation; If I would have thought in reverse direction then I would have chosen E;

In b/w B and E. I'll go with B
because both of these stmts contradict each other.

I think bad question ...

Source please?
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 226
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 36 [1] , given: 11

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 13 Aug 2010, 07:17
1
This post received
KUDOS
onedayill wrote:
I myself choose B,

but after reading your explanation; If I would have thought in reverse direction then I would have chosen E;

In b/w B and E. I'll go with B
because both of these stmts contradict each other.

I think bad question ...

Source please?


It is actually a really good question my friend,

B is incorrect because:
The premise only say : "If not 10%, it will bankrupt", it never say anything about what if you achieve 10%, hell, you may still go bankrupt or you not, we don't know.

It is like saying "If David Beckham doesn't play, LA Galaxy will lose" but hey, even when Backham play, the LA Galaxy still lose, we only know for sure that the LA Galaxy will 100% lose if Beckham doesn't play.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 227
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 3

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 13 Aug 2010, 07:36
Excellent question and nice explanation. Thanks.
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1560
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 230 [0], given: 6

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2010, 13:30
Quote:
But how can we deduce Point 2? if 20% is not possible then 10% may/ may not be possible !


Point 2 can be deduced based on the following:

Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 122
Location: india
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 10

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2010, 01:39
DIFFICULT QUESTION B FOR ME
Current Student
User avatar
Affiliations: Volunteer Operation Smile India, Creative Head of College IEEE branch (2009-10), Chief Editor College Magazine (2009), Finance Head College Magazine (2008)
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 471
Location: India
WE2: Entrepreneur (E-commerce - The Laptop Skin Vault)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE: Marketing (Other)
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 24

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 07 Sep 2010, 01:01
Confusing...
_________________

Kidchaos

http://www.laptopskinvault.com

Follow The Laptop Skin Vault on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/TheLaptopSkinVault
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/LaptopSkinVault

Consider Kudos if you think the Post is good
Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot. Nothing is going to change. It's not. - Dr. Seuss

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2010
Posts: 162
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 101

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 07 Sep 2010, 06:47
its e
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 225
Location: Boston
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 5

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 08 Sep 2010, 04:45
It's (E) by contrapositive. You have the implication "If a 10% increase is possible, then a 20% increase is possible." The contrapositive of that is "If a 20% increase isn't possible, then a 10% increase isn't possible." And we know as a given fact that if a 10% increase isn't possible, then the company is going bankrupt. Hence, (E).

(B) is wrong because it's an inverse relationship, which is not equivalent. A -> B does not mean that ~A -> ~B. Nowhere in the original statement does it say that the company WILL DEFINITELY NOT GO BANKRUPT if they improve 10%, or 20%, or even 150%. You just know that they WILL definitely go bankrupt if they don't improve 10%.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 44
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 8

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 08 Sep 2010, 10:30
good one
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 239
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 17

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 08 Sep 2010, 10:44
1
This post received
KUDOS
rohitgoel15 wrote:
Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, Inc., must increase productivity, 10 percent over the course of the next two years, or it will certainly go bankrupt. In fact, however, Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable.
If the statements above are true, which one of the following must on the basis of them also be true?
It is important to note in the passage that if 20 % is attainable then 10% if easily attainable. Passage quote -"Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable. But is 10% cannot be attained then 20% cannot be attained too.
(A) It is only Quore’s production structure that makes it possible for Quore to survive the transformation of the market. Nothing given to support this
(B) Quore will not go bankrupt if it achieves a productivity increase of 20 percent over the next two years. Just a restatement of the passage information. No inference
(C) If the market had not been transformed, Quore would have required no productivity increase in order to avoid bankruptcy.This has nothing to do with the question asked
(D) Because of the transformation of the market, Quore will achieve a productivity increase of 10 percent over the next two years. No data supports this prediction.
(E) If a 20 percent productivity increase is unattainable for Quore, then it must go bankrupt.
the passage says Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable. so if I cannot get 20 that means I cannot get 10 simply because if I get 10 I can get 20.
The explanation given in one of the gmat thread's is:
they tell you that if it doesn't increase by 10%, it will go bankrupt. this is diagrammed as:
(1) if (not)10% -> then bankrupt.
next it says if 10% is possible, then 20% is possible. this is diagrammed as:
10% possible -> then 20% possible
next, you should always look at the converse of statements, as that will usually be the key to unlocking the problem. the converse of this statement is:

(2) if 20% not possible -> 10% not possible
now you have everything you need. if you add equation 1 to the end of equation 2, you will see that E is true:
if 20% not possible ->10 % not possible -> then bankrupt
therefore, E is the answer

But how can we deduce Point 2? if 20% is not possible then 10% may/ may not be possible !


E is relevant and survives POE
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 239
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 17

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 08 Sep 2010, 10:48
E is just stating the reverse of what the passage says yet it is an inference. You infered the info that if not 20 then not 10.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 143
Followers: 1

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

Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 14 Sep 2010, 05:31
nice explanation
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
Posts: 3
Followers: 0

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

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, [#permalink] New post 05 Jul 2012, 02:36
I totally agree with answer as E

I wanted one small clarification why option C is wrong.See the conclusion given is " Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, Inc., must increase productivity". and one premise is "Quore’s production structure is such that if a 10 percent productivity increase is possible, then a 20 percent increase is attainable " . If we pay attention to first statement it clearly says that the urgency was caused by transformation of market then the option C which points out exact meaning as those posed from sentence in para must be valid .
Please provide precise analysis why this option should be left out and how it has nothing to do with question.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 70
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 14

Re: Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, [#permalink] New post 19 Jun 2013, 11:55
can someone please explain why C is wrong?
3 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1124
Location: United States
Followers: 140

Kudos [?]: 1400 [3] , given: 122

Re: Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, [#permalink] New post 19 Jun 2013, 14:44
3
This post received
KUDOS
veenu08 wrote:
can someone please explain why C is wrong?


Hi veenu08.

C has a very common logical fallacy.

The logical fallacy is:
Fact: X happens ==> Y MUST happen
Conclusion: X does not happen ==> Y MUST NOT happen

This is wrong conclusion. Why?
Because X is only one of many factors that cause Y happen. If X does not happen, other factor may cause Y happen.

For example:
Fact: I have a flu ==> I MUST stay at home to avoid further health problem
Conclusion: I don't have a flu ==> I MUST NOT stay at home to avoid further health problem

Is the conclusion correct? Nope, because flu is only one of many factors that causes health problem. Even I don't have a flu, but doctor recommends me that "I MUST stay at home" because there's a seasonal flu and many people are infected.

Back to the question.
market transformation happens ==> Quore MUST increase productivity to avoid bankruptcy
market transformation DOES NOT happen ==> Quore MUST NOT increase productivity to avoid bankruptcy
==> WRONG because market transformation IS NOT THE ONLY FACTOR. For example: Quore did not increase productivity, but the company still went to bankruptcy because of aggressive competition or its customer went to bankruptcy and did not make payment on time, blah blah......

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMV Chief of Design.

Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 490
Followers: 45

Kudos [?]: 451 [0], given: 249

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: recent transformation [#permalink] New post 08 Oct 2013, 14:59
onedayill wrote:
I myself choose B,

but after reading your explanation; If I would have thought in reverse direction then I would have chosen E;

In b/w B and E. I'll go with B
because both of these stmts contradict each other.

I think bad question ...

Source please?


It is a Non-gmat like question that involves formal logic most probably from the LSAT collection
_________________

How to CHOOSE your Business School
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

Rules for posting on the verbal forum
When you post a question Pls. Provide its source & TAG your questions
Avoid posting from unreliable sources such as 1000 series.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 367
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 291

Re: Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, [#permalink] New post 11 Oct 2013, 21:05
Alright this is what I understood, to win a race a person must run 10 miles atleast. If he is able to run 10 miles then he is also able to run 20 miles. The answer says that he is unable to run 20 miles, hence he cannot win. What if he runs 10 miles maybe he ran 15 mile or even 19 miles but he could not run 20 miles. He still wins. Its just that he didn't run 20 miles. The criteria clearly suggests requirement of 10 miles to be completed.
Re: Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore,   [#permalink] 11 Oct 2013, 21:05
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, talk2pk 15 10 Sep 2009, 19:21
1 Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, prude_sb 16 26 Aug 2006, 16:05
Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, sushom101 8 27 Oct 2005, 12:32
Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore, HSWKM 8 09 Jan 2005, 04:52
Studies indicate that the job market for recent gayathri 5 05 Jan 2005, 12:59
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Because of the recent transformation of the market. Quore,

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.