NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 08:11 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 08:11
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
 1   2   
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
nitya34
Director
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 518
Own Kudos [?]: 3825 [144]
Given Kudos: 17
Send PM
In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 27 Jun 2021, 13:05
6
Kudos
138
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

48% (02:20) correct 52% (02:43) wrong based on 3308 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called “pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo aquarium” of relatively modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?


(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.

(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.

(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.

(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.

(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
B

Originally posted by nitya34 on 22 Mar 2009, 11:18.
Last edited by Bunuel on 27 Jun 2021, 13:05, edited 2 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Technext
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 66
Own Kudos [?]: 341 [35]
Given Kudos: 0
Concentration: International Business
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   24 Mar 2009, 21:28
31
Kudos
4
Bookmarks
In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called “pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo aquarium” of relatively modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?


Explanation:
---------------------
(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo. ---> This option mentions only local residents. So, discard it.

(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums. ---> Well, I could easily figure out this option as the answer by method of elimination but to provide reasoning as to why this should be correct, I referred Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (The dictionary you can trust - 30 million copies sold :) ), which states a vacationer as a holidaymaker (a person who is visiting a place on holiday/vacation). So, this option makes sense. If few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums, then people from other places will have to visit these areas that have pure aquariums.

(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one. ---> Inconclusive because we don’t have any idea about the number of zoos and aquariums that were present 10 years back.

(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo. ---> It only mentions likelihood (having a high probability) but not certainty. So, we can discard it.

(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby. ---> It’s comparing irrelevant information (zoo aquariums of zoos & aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby).
---------------------

My choice is option B.

Hope that helps.


Regards,
Technext
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14817
Own Kudos [?]: 64894 [27]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 24 Sep 2014, 22:09
22
Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
jgomey wrote:

I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows:

Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction.

B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium."


Actually, notice another thing. You don't have to explain why more people are visiting pure aquariums (actually that may not be true. Overall, the number of people visiting pure aquariums might be lesser). You have to explain why visitors to pure aquariums are 50% vacationers (and other 50% are perhaps local people) while visitors to zoos are only 25% vacationers while other 75% are local people. The number of people visiting the pure aquarium and the number visiting the zoo are not an issue at all. The issue is the different demography: vacationers vs locals.
The reasons can be two:
- Vacationers find pure aquariums attractive for some reason (as B explains - its because there are fewer pure aquariums)
- Local people prefer zoo over pure aquarium (probably because their kids want to visit zoos and often)

Originally posted by KarishmaB on 23 Jan 2013, 21:26.
Last edited by KarishmaB on 24 Sep 2014, 22:09, edited 1 time in total.
General Discussion
User avatar
pleonasm
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 266
Own Kudos [?]: 156 [3]
Given Kudos: 24
Location: PDX
Concentration: Entrepreneurship
 Q44  V40
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   22 Mar 2009, 19:24
1
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
A bit tricky but here goes my explanation:

It's a numbers based question - so let's say there are 50 visitors to pure aquariums and 50 visitors to zoo aquariums. The argument says that around 30 visitors to pure aquariums are vacationers where as around 10 visitors to zoo aquariums are vacationers. How to explain this discrepancy ?

(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
Argument is about vacationers/tourists - not locals : Rule out
(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Visiting metropolitan/urban areas is not mentioned in the argument - OOS
(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.
So this essentially means there are more pure aquariums than zoo aquariums. Doesn't help to understand why more tourists are going to PA's as opposed to ZA's.
(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
Compelling evidence : If a visitor visits a ZA and is prompted to go to a PA - he adds to the existing traffic of tourists to PA. So this contributes to more tourist traffic to PA, explaining the paradox.
(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
OOS - the size of aquariums is irrelevant.

-pradeep
avatar
gmark
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [3]
Given Kudos: 0
Concentration: General
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   23 Mar 2009, 09:42
3
Kudos
The answer is B.
There are few aquariums so this explains why there are more visitors from other cities.
User avatar
angel2009
Manager
Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 723 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   27 Jan 2010, 20:21
1
Bookmarks
got it at last why D is wrong. Nice one thats why need to put this analysis for all:
(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
We are talking about visitors or vacationers but still if it is true it weaks the argument

(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
A plausible reason why vacationers would be more interested in visiting a pure aquarium than a zoo

(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.
Proportion of aquariums to zoos is not an issue

(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
Probability of visit is not an issue

(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
Size of zoo is not an issue
User avatar
akshathbs
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 66
Own Kudos [?]: 73 [3]
Given Kudos: 14
Concentration: FINANce!!!!!..:))))))))
Schools:Wharton..:)
 Q47  V41
GPA: 3.5 +
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   30 Nov 2010, 10:04
3
Kudos
"Well, I could easily figure out this option as the answer by method of elimination but to provide reasoning as to why this should be correct, I referred Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (The dictionary you can trust - 30 million copies sold ), which states a vacationer as a holidaymaker (a person who is visiting a place on holiday/vacation). So, this option makes sense. If few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums, then people from other places will have to visit these areas that have pure aquariums."

don't really understand the basis for the highlighted text..simple question why would they HAVE TO VISIT??
to some ve to extent i would have to agree with D
User avatar
u0422811
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Posts: 148
Own Kudos [?]: 292 [2]
Given Kudos: 2
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
Schools: Booth '15 (A) CBS '15 (M) HBS '15 (D) Stanford '15 (D) Yale '15 (A) Wharton '15 (D)
GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   28 Mar 2011, 21:50
2
Kudos
The answer is B.

You need to find a reason as to why more vacationers are visiting pure aquariums over zoos. B argues this by stating that most cities have zoos but very few have aquariums. Therefore people are more likely to be local at their zoo and be a visiting vacationer at an aquarium.
User avatar
Triforce
Intern
Intern
Joined: 23 Nov 2012
Posts: 27
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [5]
Given Kudos: 19
Location: France
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Said (D)
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE:Sales (Investment Banking)
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   23 Jan 2013, 06:12
3
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Quote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.


Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?


A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo
Wrong Wrong direction if local residents (LRs) would be twice as likely to visit A then there would be less of them in Z. The passage supports that there are rather fewer LRs in A.

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Correct One could conclude that people from other regions will go on vacation to visit A but not Z since they could do it at home. This would explain why the propotion of visitors to LRs is higher in A.


C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1
Wrong Out of scope. We do not care about the number of Z or A.

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.
Wrong This says nothing about the relationship of the number of visitors to LRs in A or Z.


E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
Wrong Size says nothing about the relationship between the number of visitors to LRs.
avatar
jgomey
Intern
Intern
Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Status:GMAT Streetfighter!!
Posts: 32
Own Kudos [?]: 327 [0]
Given Kudos: 21
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Finance
GPA: 3.87
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 23 Jan 2013, 18:52
Triforce wrote:
Quote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.


Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?


A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo
Wrong Wrong direction if local residents (LRs) would be twice as likely to visit A then there would be less of them in Z. The passage supports that there are rather fewer LRs in A.

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Correct One could conclude that people from other regions will go on vacation to visit A but not Z since they could do it at home. This would explain why the propotion of visitors to LRs is higher in A.


C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1
Wrong Out of scope. We do not care about the number of Z or A.

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.
Wrong This says nothing about the relationship of the number of visitors to LRs in A or Z.


E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
Wrong Size says nothing about the relationship between the number of visitors to LRs.




Excellent Analysis!

I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows:

Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction.

B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium."

Originally posted by jgomey on 23 Jan 2013, 16:59.
Last edited by jgomey on 23 Jan 2013, 18:52, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
B
highdiving
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Posts: 120
Own Kudos [?]: 26 [1]
Given Kudos: 85
Location: Italy
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V34
GPA: 3.1
WE:Sales (Transportation)
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   30 Jan 2013, 04:12
1
Kudos
One little helpful trick here is to try and figure out an explanation even before you read the options.

Why would there be many more tourists to aquariums than to zoos? maybe because there are more zoos for the locals to visit.

If a family has one aquarium close to home and two zoos it makes sense for them to visit the aquarium one time a year, and each of the two zoos one time. Resulting in a bigger number of locals visiting zoos.

Or another explanation could be that the zoo changes animals more often so it makes more sense for locals to go visit more often.

If you scan the options and find one that s coherent with your train of thoughts (like in this case) then you are in a good spot.
avatar
TheNona
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 200
Own Kudos [?]: 177 [1]
Given Kudos: 181
Concentration: Leadership, Marketing
Schools: Desautels '15 (A)
GMAT 1: 540 Q36 V28
GMAT 2: 550 Q39 V27
GMAT 3: 620 Q42 V33
GPA: 2.82
WE:Human Resources (Health Care)
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   13 Mar 2013, 04:58
1
Kudos
Hmmmmmmmmmm ... I still believe that B is out of scope . Can any body clarify more why B in particular ? Thanks in advance
User avatar
Vercules
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Status:Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Posts: 442
Own Kudos [?]: 5415 [2]
Given Kudos: 82
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: Kenan-Flagler '15 (A) McCombs '15 (I) Tepper '15 (M) Kellogg '15 (I) HBS '15 (D) Wharton '15 (D) Stern '15 (WL) Simon '15 (A)
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   13 Mar 2013, 05:55
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
TheNona wrote:
Hmmmmmmmmmm ... I still believe that B is out of scope . Can any body clarify more why B in particular ? Thanks in advance


Hi TheNona,

In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called “pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo aquarium” of relatively modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few large metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of two to one.
(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

The stimulus says that Vacations account of > 50% (lets say 50) of all visitors at "aquariums", this implies that the rest i.e. < 50% (50) are locals. But these same visitors account for < 25% (50) of all visitors (\(\frac{25* 50}{100}\)= 200) at) "Zoos"; this would imply that >75% (200 - 25 = 175) are locals.

If there must be more zoos than pure aquariums, then people from other areas (vacationers) will visit the places which are not available to them in their local areas.

This is a tough question and it could be difficult to answer it correctly under 2 minutes.

Hope this helps,

Vercules
User avatar
ronr34
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 259
Own Kudos [?]: 239 [0]
Given Kudos: 58
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   24 Sep 2014, 09:19
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
jgomey wrote:

I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows:

Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction.

B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium."


Actually, notice another thing. You don't have to explain why more people are visiting pure aquariums (actually that may not be true. Overall, the number of people visiting pure aquariums might be lesser). You have to explain why visitors to pure aquariums are 50% vacationers (and other 50% are perhaps local people) while visitors to zoos are only 25% vacationers while other 75% are local people. The number of people visiting the pure aquarium and the number visiting the zoo are not an issue at all. The issue is the different demography: vacationers vs locals.
The reasons can be two:
- Vacationers find pure aquariums attractive for some reason (as C explains - its because there are fewer pure aquariums)
- Local people prefer zoo over pure aquarium (probably because their kids want to visit zoos and often)

Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?
User avatar
pqhai
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 871
Own Kudos [?]: 8554 [3]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   24 Sep 2014, 12:24
1
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Good question. A lot of traps.

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo
Wrong. The argument says "vacationers" in general, NOT just "local residents".

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Correct. B mentions the basic rule "DEMAND-SUPPLY". This is very frequently shown on GMAT. If supply is less than demand, definitely the number of vacationers going to pure aquarium must be greater than that of vacationers going to zoo.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1
Wrong. The greater number of aquarium does not mean the greater number of vacationers. It depends on the "supply-demand" rule.

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.
Wrong. Same error as in A. The argument says "vacationers" in general, NOT just "People who visit zoos". How about people who do NOT visit zoo? D can't explain.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.
Wrong. Th size of zoo aquarium does not directly mean the greater/less number of vacationers.

Only B make sense and is correct.

Takeaway: Be aware of the supply-demand logic in GMAT.

Hope my simple explanation helps.
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14817
Own Kudos [?]: 64894 [0]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   24 Sep 2014, 22:08
Expert Reply
ronr34 wrote:
Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?


The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors.
User avatar
ronr34
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 259
Own Kudos [?]: 239 [0]
Given Kudos: 58
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   25 Sep 2014, 00:33
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
ronr34 wrote:
Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?


The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors.

So I would like to ask a follow up question then...
(b) limits the scope of this to just metropolitan areas.
But we aren't talking about tourists or citizens of metropolitan areas, so how can this be right?
Doesn't this option limit us to the sample size we are talking about?
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14817
Own Kudos [?]: 64894 [0]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   25 Sep 2014, 20:42
Expert Reply
ronr34 wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
ronr34 wrote:
Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?


The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors.

So I would like to ask a follow up question then...
(b) limits the scope of this to just metropolitan areas.
But we aren't talking about tourists or citizens of metropolitan areas, so how can this be right?
Doesn't this option limit us to the sample size we are talking about?



Option (B) implies that zoos are much more common than pure aquariums. It doesn't limit the scope to metropolitan areas. Metropolitan cities have the most facilities and infrastructure so if very few metropolitan cities have pure aquariums, it is highly likely that there are very few pure aquariums.
avatar
iPen
Manager
Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 86
Own Kudos [?]: 107 [0]
Given Kudos: 40
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   08 Jul 2015, 19:09
(B). Plenty of zoos, comparatively fewer pure aquariums, and fewer pure aquarium visitors means that the niche of pure aquarium visitors would compose a smaller % of the zoo visitor population, assuming that zoos attract a wide general audience. So, less overall pure aquarium visitors and more general population means a smaller % of the zoo visitors should be seen for pure aquarium visitors.

And, pure aquarium visitors are probably more likely to go to a pure aquarium attraction to see water animals, and not to see land animals and birds. Zoos have aquariums, but they're more modest, so they may be more inclined to skip the zoo altogether. This is more of a tertiary (not even secondary) point since this effect would be negated by the fewer number of pure aquariums, which means less access, greater transportation cost, perhaps even higher ticket costs with greater relative demand, and so there's a greater compromise by pure aquarium visitors to go to the smaller zoo aquariums instead.
User avatar
P
JS1290
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 241
Own Kudos [?]: 238 [0]
Given Kudos: 1103
Send PM
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink] New post   13 Nov 2018, 19:07
VeritasKarishma,

Hi Karishma,

I was wondering could you please explain why option E is incorrect? I assumed that vacationers visiting a specific city may be attracted to the larger "pure aquarium" vs the smaller zoo aquariums. Is E wrong because we don't know how many "cities" there are where both a zoo and an aquarium exists? If there were only 2 such cities, the difference wouldn't be accounted for, right?
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: In the United States, vacationers account for more than half of all vi [#permalink]
13 Nov 2018, 19:07
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions