|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 749
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 0
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total [#permalink]
28 Jul 2007, 13:27
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain.
Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way. Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices. Many policyholders will respond to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.
D. The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking to establish.
Appologies! Fixed the bold face.
Last edited by asaf on 28 Jul 2007, 15:20, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 938
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR - GmatPrep BoldFace [#permalink]
28 Jul 2007, 13:28
asaf wrote: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain. Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way. Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices. Many policyholders will respond to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.
D. The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking to establish.
What parts are "bold faced"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 11
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Is it D?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 178
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
its D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 158
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
I go for B.
The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion - "During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain"
the second is that conclusion - "Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts".
This is tricky!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 95
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
A. The first one is not ruling out any strategy.
B. Best Answer. First one supports conclusion, second one is the conclusion.
C. Second is not reporting the decision to adopt strategy, it reports the results of that strategy.
D. Second one does report decison to pursue alternative goal, goal is the same.
E. The first one is a consideration FOR not AGAINST.
My pick is B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2007
Posts: 374
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain. <-- fact
Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts. <-- conclusion
hence, B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 99
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
B for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
89
[0], given: 0
|
B gives the cloest fit. The rest are problematic.
A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; --> no such thing
C. the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy. --> no decision made
D.the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal. --> no such thing
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal --> no opposition to the strategy was presented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 938
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 0
|
i picked B although not 100% confident
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 127
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR - GmatPrep BoldFace [#permalink]
07 Sep 2007, 05:14
asaf wrote: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain. Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way. Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices. Many policyholders will respond to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
Second part is conculsion and that is correct but I am not clear if we can say that first part is a judgment. So ruling out. C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.
Second is a conlusion i.e. decision to follow the alternate strategy. And first part does offer an considerdation and which logically tirggers rest of the argument. So I am picking this one as correct.
D. The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking to establish.
Appologies! Fixed the bold face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 217
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
B is the closest for me.
With C the problem is the second bf as it does not offer a alternative strategy.
C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.
first bf is an consideration to follow a strategy. But senond bf does not offer an alternative strategy.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking to establish.
first bf is not a consideration offered against adopting the strategy. thus it is wrong.
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
first bf is a judgement(kind of) in support of a conclusion.
I am not entirely convinced but still will go with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 298
Location: Russia, Moscow
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
11
[0], given: 0
|
A for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 146
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
Agree with B
What's the OA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 70
Schools: HBS '10
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
OA is B (from GMATprep)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar topics |
Author |
Replies |
Last post |
|
Similar Topics:
|
|
|
|
During past yr, Pro-Tect insurance company's total payout on
|
ronybtl |
7 |
01 Dec 2005, 18:33 |
|
1
|
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total
|
goalsnr |
9 |
26 May 2008, 08:33 |
|
2
|
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company's total
|
arorag |
7 |
05 Oct 2008, 20:44 |
|
|
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total
|
ankur55 |
8 |
22 Jul 2009, 21:24 |
|
|
|
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company's total
|
jkaustubh |
4 |
02 Apr 2013, 18:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|