|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]
 14 Mar 2005, 01:24
Question Stats:
38% (01:57) correct
61% (02:02) wrong based on 0 sessions
In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional monopolies and operated with little regard for what customers wanted. In recent years, with improvements to the Ostronian national highway network, the railroad companies have faced heavy competition from long-distance trucking companies. But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses, the companies continue to disregard customers’ needs and desires.
If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them?
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1135
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
A for me
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
-> see the statement "But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses, the companies continue to disregard customers’ needs and desires."
(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
-> We have no information about that, just about railroad companies and about their situation, no about other companies
(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
-> We have no information on that, just that they disregard customers’ needs and desires.
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
-> No information about the efficiency . We know that companies still disregard customers’ needs and desires
(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
-> No information about that
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
- Not sure of this. We're told they operate at a loss, but we're not sure if they will fold up because of the operating loss.
(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
- Follows the logic of the passage closely. Choice B is good.
(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
- Not nescesary. We're only told they have little regard, but not sure what are the details of the disregard (is it high pricing, or bad service or something else ?)
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
- Out of scope
(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
_ Not important with survival, but whether they have subsidies.
B it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 772
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
E it is
B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.
_________________
Praveen
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2322
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
157
[0], given: 0
|
This is a case where all choices seem pretty good. However only E is absolutely right. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
I believe it is (E)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 31
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR030108--Ostronian railroad [#permalink]
14 Mar 2005, 15:18
It is 'E' for me.
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
Nothing is mentioned about to what extent are the losses. We cannot assume that some of the companies will shut shop and some will continue to operate.
(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
Cannot say this is definite from the passage
(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
Reject: There is no mention of Price in passage.
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
Reject: This is unnecessary and there are implications for efficiency.
(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
Correct: Holds good from the passage i.e. passage mentions that companies with no regards for customers' desires have survived.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1135
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
I still continue to fight for my A 
I don't see where is the flow in it because it is stated :
"But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses"
-> if no more subsidies, railroad companies can not operate
However, I must admit that E seems also to be the answer...what's OA ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
E it is. I did not see the 'nonetheless' when i was attempting the question. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
praveen_rao7 wrote: E it is
B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.
Hello, Praveen
E says ' some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'
Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
Hi, HongHu.
Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.
We cannot make sure that if no government subsidies, companies don't continue to operate.
That's the rule of thumb.
If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.
Am I right? Please correct me.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1135
Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
chunjuwu wrote: Hi, HongHu.
Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.
If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.
Am I right? Please correct me.
Thanks
chunjuwu, maybe I am wrong but I disagree with the use of "if" -> the sentence is using "because" so :
because A -> B
if no A -> no B
the difference is important between IF and BECAUSE 
do we have a OA for this one ? even with no explanation so that ce can figure it out...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 589
Location: SF Bay Area, USA
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
A is wrong because there is no in no information provided that tells us that those companies will not continue to operate without subsidies - may be they will become more efficient without subsidies!
Contra-Positive logic applies to the following pattern and is always true:
If A, then B,
If not B, then not A.
If Goverment subsidy ->companies operate
If companies don't operate, -> Goverment does not give subsidy
Wrong Logic:
If A, then B
If not A then not B
is wrong logic
If Goverment subsidy -> companies operate
If Goverment does not give subsidy -> companies don't operate
is wrong
E) is clearly the answer as we don't have to make any assumptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 772
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
chunjuwu wrote: praveen_rao7 wrote: E it is
B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option. Hello, Praveen E says ' some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...' Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers? a little means ---> some
little means---> almost nothing
same thing with a few and few
_________________
Praveen
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2322
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
157
[0], given: 0
|
chunjuwu wrote: Hi, HongHu.
Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.
We cannot make sure that if no government subsidies, companies don't continue to operate.
That's the rule of thumb.
If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.
Am I right? Please correct me.
Thanks
Good logic. :b: I'm not sure what "it" refers to in you next sentence "It's not necessary." I think you meant that A is not necessary condition of B, right? And that'd be correct.
When I first saw A I thought it may be right too. But then I read C and realized that both A and C could be right, but they can't be both right since there's only one right choice, yet we can't say one is more right than the other, therefore both of them must be wrong.
In less confusing words, what I just said is: If government stops subsidizing, the companies may go broke, they may need to raise their prices, or they may need to some other things such as reforms or something. We don't know which one for sure. Since the questions asks what must be true, not may be true, these are not our answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2322
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
157
[0], given: 0
|
praveen_rao7 wrote: chunjuwu wrote: praveen_rao7 wrote: E it is
B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option. Hello, Praveen E says ' some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...' Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers? a little means ---> some little means---> almost nothing same thing with a few and few Almost nothing still is not nothing though. That's why we are not absolutely sure. We need to choose the one answer that we are absolutely sure for this questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Dec 2004
Posts: 277
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
Wrong! The companies may still operate without the subsidies.
If A then B, If not A, cannot say anything about B
(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
Wrong, out of scope.
(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
Wrong, out of scope. They may chose to decrease further service to customers to recover losses.
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
Wrong, Out of scope. It may be little better. but not good enough.
(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
Ther use of "some" makes it relevant. its certainly true that some companies have survived disregarding the customers' needs.
"E" is my choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
Antmavel wrote: I still continue to fight for my A I don't see where is the flow in it because it is stated : "But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses" -> if no more subsidies, railroad companies can not operate However, I must admit that E seems also to be the answer...what's OA ? Antmavel, A cannot be the right answer. Choice (A) talks about a number of the companies going bust if they lose the government subsidies. But this is not supported for in the passage. To arrive at this conclusion, you will probably need another assumption (something you shuoldn't make off hand just to make your answer choice fit in) or another premise would have to be given to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
chunjuwu wrote: praveen_rao7 wrote: E it is
B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option. Hello, Praveen E says ' some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...' Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers? Another way to see this would be "In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived."
We know from the passage that at least some survived and they continue to disregard their customers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 772
Location: Milwaukee
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
can we have OA please?
_________________
Praveen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
