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

It is currently 26 Oct 2014, 01:37

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

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 78
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 3

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 20:24
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

62% (03:15) correct 38% (00:46) wrong based on 7 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.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 141
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 650 Q51 V27
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 21

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 21:42
ankur55 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.



First sentence tell you the limit to achieve certain goal.

Which coincides with Option A.

Second sentence suggests alternate plan. After second sentence the plan is elaborated & reasoned.

Which also coincides with Option A. :D

Hope I am right. :|
_________________

I am ready to fall, but not before I fly.

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 805
Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 419 [0], given: 56

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 21:54
Tricky question. I would opt A, though some other options also looks quite tempting.

The argument is talking about two strategies to reduce the payout:
1st, by changing the car-theft policies, which is not possible
2nd, by encouraging policyholders to install anti-theft device
Based on this the argument is giving the conclusion to opt for 2nd strategy.

Please note, this is not the main conclusion. Rather the main conclusion is in the last line "Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts."

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. -Correct
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion. -First is not a judgment to support 2nd, rather both are different strategies.
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. -Both are different strategies, without any relation.
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. -Both are different strategies, without any relation.
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. -2nd is a sub-conclusion, and not the main conclusion. Rather the main conclusion is in the last line.
_________________

ISB 2011-12 thread | Ask ISB Alumni @ ThinkISB
All information related to Indian candidates and B-schools | Indian B-schools accepting GMAT scores
Self evaluation for Why MBA?

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 909
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 236 [0], given: 18

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 22:13
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
.

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.

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.

Between A and C. I would go for C.
If Blue+Red was boldfaced, I would have chosen A. Because, then it 'rules out' the strategy.

Since it is not the case, first one is only a consideration.
OA pls.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 160
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 11

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 23:15
+1 for C.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 May 2009
Posts: 78
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 3

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2009, 23:54
irajeevsingh wrote:
+1 for C.


I also chose C, however OA is A
More explanations pls
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 909
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 236 [0], given: 18

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 23 Jul 2009, 00:07
ankur55 wrote:
irajeevsingh wrote:
+1 for C.


I also chose C, however OA is A
More explanations pls

:( It is touch and go. The only thing that might make A stronger is:
"and whose effectiveness the argument assesses"...this is what the rest of the argument does.

Question to be noted, lets see if we get something similar..if yes then we can conclude that answers that encompass the argument are considered a better choice for boldfaced :)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Posts: 141
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 650 Q51 V27
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 21

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 23 Jul 2009, 02:04
Economist wrote:
[color=#FF0000][b]
Between A and C. I would go for C.
If Blue+Red was boldfaced, I would have chosen A. Because, then it 'rules out' the strategy.

Since it is not the case, first one is only a consideration.
OA pls.


The correct answer is A.

I think people who marked C, did not understand this type of question properly. (No offence)

We are supposed to find the 'Role' of the sentence. Even though 'blue part' is not bold, it is still there in given abstract. The first bold part gives you the reason that strategy will not work. 'blue part' is merely a sentence which states that 'strategy is ruled out'. It is the red part that reasons.
_________________

I am ready to fall, but not before I fly.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 33
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 0

Re: Bold CR Car Theft [#permalink] New post 23 Jul 2009, 12:26
Economist wrote:
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
.

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.

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.

Between A and C. I would go for C.
If Blue+Red was boldfaced, I would have chosen A. Because, then it 'rules out' the strategy.

Since it is not the case, first one is only a consideration.
OA pls.


Brand new here (this forum and the accompnaying community are great BTW) but thought I would chime in. C is wrong because of two words:

1.) "support" - If the "certain strategy" is to reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, the first is then a consideration against adopting that strategy, not in support of it.

2.) "alternative" - Alternatively (no pun intended), if you interpret the first as a consideration in "support" of the "certain strategy" of offering discounts for customers who install anti-theft devices (which, at least to me, seems plausible), then the decision would not be for an alternative strategy.

Hope the questions keep coming - this is great practice.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 61
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 11

Reviews Badge
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total [#permalink] New post 05 May 2014, 08:47
Hi E-GMAT,


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.


Lets Break this sentence.

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were
larger than the company can afford to sustain. Author opinion

Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries,...Author judgment

so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way. conclusion based on Author judgment.


Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices. Author plan/decision.

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. Author prediction/supporting statement.

Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts. Main conclusion.


So First in the BOLD statement, Could you please explain, How come a first bold statement support adopting a certain statergy ,which statergy we are talking about? .

The only statergy i can see is the Second bold statement. just by saying the company can't reduce the number of the policies,dosent mean its support adopting a certain statergy.


Please through some light on this.

Thanks

Nitin
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total   [#permalink] 05 May 2014, 08:47
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Experts publish their posts in the topic During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company's total jkaustubh 4 02 Apr 2013, 17:55
4 Experts publish their posts in the topic During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company's total arorag 9 05 Oct 2008, 19:44
4 During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total goalsnr 10 26 May 2008, 07:33
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total asaf 14 28 Jul 2007, 12:27
During past yr, Pro-Tect insurance company's total payout on ronybtl 7 01 Dec 2005, 17:33
Display posts from previous: Sort by

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company s total

  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®.