In order to promote long-term rental of its apartments, ARC

I am not able to select any of the options simply because none of them are accounting for the premise in the argument here- that the discount was offered to people who had been renting the apartments for more than 2 years.
If I had a gun pointed to my head and had to guess and move on, I would have gone with B.

Can you tell us what is the source of this question?

Here is the OA
Explanation: The paradox above is that even though most apartments of ARC Company have been rented for less than 2 years and therefore were not discounted, most residents lived in discounted apartments. This information does not seem surprising if, as stated in Choice B, the average number of people living in apartments rented at discounted prices was greater than the average number of people living in apartments rented at full price. This statement shows that even though fewer apartments were rented at discounted prices than at full prices, it could be true that more people lived in apartments rented at discounted prices than in apartments rented at full prices.

A) The fact that apartments rented at discounted prices are bigger and more expensive does not explain why most people live in ARC apartments rented at discounted prices, even though most ARC apartments were rented at full prices.

B) Correct. This statement best explains the paradox in the argument above.

C) The argument is concerned with full and discounted rent prices; the size of those prices is not relevant.

D) This information, if anything, strengthens the paradox, as it was stated that most apartments were rented for less than two years. If VIP apartments were among those rented for less than two years, then this information is not relevant, as they would not be subject to the discount anyway. If VIP apartments were rented for more than 2 years, then even fewer of the apartments that were rented for more than 2 years are subject to the discount. In this case, it is even more surprising that most people who live in ARC apartments live in apartments rented at discounted prices.

E) This information is not important since it is still true that most apartments are rented at full prices but more people live in apartments rented at discounted prices.

Ah! What a clever little question this is as it tries to confound you with 2 different words - 'customers' & 'residents'. So, the apartments are up for discount to 'customers' who have been renting them for more than 2 years. But the premise that is given is 'most of the residents lived in apartments that were rented at discounted prices'. Key word here is 'residents'. So a 'customer' is just one person for who the renting agreement is drawn for. That 'customer' might have family of more than 1 person, and therefore there would exist multiple residents for the same apartment. The only option that resolves the paradox is option B which states that the larger average number of residents for the discounted apartments as compared to the average number of residents for non-discounted apartments is the reason for the same.

Hope this helps!

Here we need to resolve the paradox
given most resident lived in discounted price apartment whereas most of the apartment rented fro less than two years
think if a large no of people share a single rented apartment and stay together then with in few apartment, many people can live

This is exactly said in option B and hence answer other four answer choices are irrelevant

Please, specify the source of this question

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.
_________________