Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 03:32

### 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

# Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 182
Followers: 1

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

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2005, 10:48
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 20 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporationâ€™s profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporationâ€™s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.
On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?
(A) The increase in the pharmaceutical divisionâ€™s contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.
(B) In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporationâ€™s profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.
(C) The percentage of the corporationâ€™s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisionâ€™s performance had not improved.
(D) The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.
(E) The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

pls refute E, i guess its the answer,,,but OA i have is differet!
_________________

i hate when people do'nt post the OA, it leaves in guessing!!!!

If you have any questions
New!
Current Student
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 200

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2013, 07:24
I think the correct answer is C. As the Chemical Division performed badly, it is possible that total profit (from all departments) decreased or remained same during the previous year. But the share of profit from Pharmaceutical Division increased (from 20% to 45%), we are not sure whether the absolute dollar amount increased.

It is possible that the Pharmaceutical Division performed at the same level (or maybe worse) compared to last year but still contribute 45% towards total profit because the Chemical Division did far worse and the total profit figure decreased (thus increasing Pharmaceutical's share).
Current Student
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 200

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2013, 07:26
In case of choice E, I think it is refutable as we can compare the relative contribution of two divisions for the previous year (60% or more for Chemical, 20% for Pharma) as well as this year (less than or equal to 55% for Chemical, and 45% for Pharma).
MBA Section Director
Status: On vacation...
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 3946
Location: India
City: Pune
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 395

Kudos [?]: 2883 [0], given: 2161

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2013, 08:35
I think It should be C.

Conclusion :- Pharmaceutical division becoming stronger
Evidence :- it's share in total profit has increased from 20% to 45%. Pay close attention here. Increase in share doesn't necessarily mean increase in profit. so this can form the best basis to criticize the evidence.

A) Wrong. We are just concerned about whether there is substantial profit increase in pharmaceutical division. doesn't matter whether it comes from a single product or two.

B) Wrong. irrelevant.

C) Contender. This choice states that without any efforts this divisions share could have increased. Then it can be inferred that other divisions have shown poor performance (Probably the chemical division most) so the share of pharmaceutical division in total profit has increased with making any increase in its profit and without getting stronger.

D) Wrong. Again we are only concerned about increase in current year profit and not that of last year.

E) Wrong. This choice can be shell game answer. This could have contender had it provide the reasons why the information is insufficient to compare the performance of both the divisions.
_________________
MBA Section Director
Status: On vacation...
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 3946
Location: India
City: Pune
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 395

Kudos [?]: 2883 [1] , given: 2161

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2013, 08:37
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
I think It should be C.

Conclusion :- Pharmaceutical division becoming stronger
Evidence :- it's share in total profit has increased from 20% to 45%. Pay close attention here. Increase in share doesn't necessarily mean increase in profit. so this can form the best basis to criticize the evidence.

A) Wrong. We are just concerned about whether there is substantial profit increase in pharmaceutical division. doesn't matter whether it comes from a single product or two.

B) Wrong. irrelevant.

C) Contender. This choice states that without any efforts this divisions share could have increased. Then it can be inferred that other divisions have shown poor performance (Probably the chemical division most) so the share of pharmaceutical division in total profit has increased with making any increase in its profit and without getting stronger.

D) Wrong. Again we are only concerned about increase in current year profit and not that of last year.

E) Wrong. This choice can be shell game answer. This could have contender had it provide the reasons why the information is insufficient to compare the performance of both the divisions.
_________________
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10534
Followers: 919

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2015, 01:42
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Intern
Joined: 20 May 2015
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 21

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jun 2016, 01:13
It should be C.
The % profits of both the divisions can be compared. From 20% to 45% for pharma division, whereas 60% to <=55% for chemical division.

Conclusion: It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporationâ€™s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.

(C) The percentage of the corporationâ€™s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisionâ€™s performance had not improved.

C clearly weakens by saying that profits could have increased even if performance had not improved. Negating this hurts the conclusion.
Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for   [#permalink] 22 Jun 2016, 01:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Due to budget constraints for the upcoming year, the corporate office 1 22 Nov 2015, 10:09
21 Over the last ten years, the Office of the Provost has 13 27 Mar 2012, 08:40
27 Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for 19 01 Nov 2010, 07:39
21 Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for 31 23 Aug 2009, 10:13
Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for 7 19 Jul 2007, 11:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by