|
Author |
Message |
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1683
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
Statement of a United States copper mining company: Import quotas should be imposed on the less expensive copper mined outside the country to maintain the price of copper in this country; otherwise, our companies will not be able to stay in business. Response of a United States copper wire manufacturer: United States wire and cable manufacturers purchase about 70 percent of the copper mined in the United States. If the copper prices we pay are not at the international level, our sales will drop, and then the demand for United States copper will go down.
If the factual information presented by both companies is accurate, the best assessment of the logical relationship between the two arguments is that the wire manufacturer's argument
(A) is self-serving and irrelevant to the proposal of the mining company
(B) is circular, presupposing what it seeks to prove about the proposal of the mining company
(C) shows that the proposal of the mining company would have a negative effect on the mining company's own business
(D) fails to give a reason why the proposal of the mining company should not be put into effect to alleviate the concern of the mining company for staying in business
(E) establishes that even the mining company's business will prosper if the mining company's proposal is rejected
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 150
Location: India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Good stuff Stolyar ! 
The answer is C and the logic is the following:
Wire and cable manufacturers buy 70% of copper mined in the US. Secondly, these manufacturers would be uncompetitive if they pay higher price for raw material, i.e. mined copper, and would therefore lose business. This would result in loss of sales for copper mining companies too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1683
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
It is E, this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 150
Location: India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
hmmm...... 
this was a tough one for me - I still can't figure out how to choose between C and E..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Posts: 142
Location: Hockeytown
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
prashant wrote: hmmm...... this was a tough one for me - I still can't figure out how to choose between C and E..... This question is awful. C and E are not different, except that E has the word "even," implying that any change will affect both the mining company and the wire manufacturer. That probably makes it the "best" answer, but you're well on your way to a 95%ile + in the verbal if this thing comes up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Founder
Status: On Vacation :-)
Affiliations: UA-1K, SPG-G, HH-D
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 10393
Location: United States (WA)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Hospitality and Tourism)
Followers: 1356
Kudos [?]:
4175
[0], given: 3117
|
stolyar wrote: It is E, this time.
You're getting popular; people hate you, just like Bill Gates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 95
Location: China
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
The conditional in E, I think, is the clinching factor
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1957
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
Let the answer be E but I would have chosen C. I guess even a wall street analyst for mining and metalurgy would have choosen C. grrrrrrr.
I do not understand how things are established about prosperity
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 29 May 2003
Posts: 21
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
I still think the answer should be C, how can they establish the prosperity of the ming business?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 20
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
C might be wrong because a mere proposal by its self (in this particular case) can not affect business. Accepted proposal can. Consequently, C might be even worse option than E. I initially chose C.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 773
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
stolyar wrote: It is E, this time.
I disagree. The mining company claims that the status quo hurts it now. Although the wire company claims that the proposal might exascerbate the problem, NO WHERE does it refute the statement that the status quo is hurting the mining company now. Hence, E cannot possibly be the answer.
_________________
Best,
AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, Zarrolou, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab
|
close
