Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 Jan 2017, 14:14

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 01 May 2009
Posts: 41
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2009, 06:07
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (02:03) correct 50% (01:54) wrong based on 42 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods, and banks have issued fewer mortgages. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously.

Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?
A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.
B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.
C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.
D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.
E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.

Hmmm, in a tricky CR question like this, there are normally two strong candidates for answer. I would think A and C are the possible answers here.

But, would C be able to weaken the reasoning? If there were more re-sales of condominiums, wouldn't that suggest that there are still a lot of people moving to City X - weakening the concusion? But, answer A has the same effect - weakening the conclusion too...
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 850
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 310 [1] , given: 106

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2009, 06:59
1
KUDOS
I think A is stronger.

C requires an assumption that the owner, existing citizen, after selling the condo will move out of the city and new citizen will move in.

there may be a case that existing citizens in cities are A, B, C D

A sell to B
B sell to C
C sell to D
D sell to A

No new citizen.
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ...
My debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Director
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 897
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 28

Kudos [?]: 648 [1] , given: 18

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2009, 23:57
1
KUDOS
Yup...even I thought for a second about C. But in order to find a flaw we need to attack the "cause" i.e. we have to prove that new citizens might be coming and this has no co-relation to the "effect" ( stopping construction ). We can do this by proving that construction has stopped due to some other reasons, for example decreased demand of houses, may be there are lot of unused houses that are open for use. A says that. "Resale" is just normal business and we cant really prove whether actually it shall decrease the demand of houses.
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 339
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 122 [0], given: 14

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2009, 16:51
Clear A
_________________

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 357
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 32

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2009, 19:25
@Economist: good analysis.
Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 454
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 119 [0], given: 5

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Aug 2009, 20:32
+1 for A.

The biggest weakness I felt with C was that it was a bit ambiguous, it did not attack the reasoning directly.

Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.

OK, re-sale increased? so what? This in no way implies or hints that people might are still moving in (thus weakening the argument.)

On the other hand, I think this actually strengthens the argument by implying that not too many people are moving in, as condos are being put on the market for re-sale.
Intern
Joined: 22 Aug 2009
Posts: 19
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 9

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2009, 11:20
A and C does not go well with the last part of the premise: "banks have issued fewer mortgages". If several housing blocks have gone on the market, which are being bought by the new residents moving to the city, that should keep up the issuance of mortgages. Same for the condominiums: re-sale needs issuance of mortgages. I ended up choosing B, thinking that an increase in the average size of a new home would make them less affordable to the new residents moving to the city, resulting in less purchases, resulting in less number of mortgages, that resulting in ample homes left on the market, bringing new development to halt, resulting in developers stopping buying land and contractors going out of work.

Any thoughts on my logic in this question are appreciated. I am taking the MGMAT tests and finding that some of the answer choices in some of the questions are ambiguous, as in this one. What is general feeling about this?
Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 58
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 6

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2009, 09:53
I am not sure guys....
But considering classical flaw in reasoning questions, shouldnt the options be more indicative failure/loophole of the reasonings.
THis question should rather be a weakening question than a flaw in reasoning question....
Please let me know if I am wrong.
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 51
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2009, 12:18
C for me.
Banks are issuing fewer mortgages to contractors because contractors are not buying as much land. Does this mean there are fewer new people moving into the area? Not necessarily because what if already built condominiums are being resold to these new people? We have to assume that the "fewer mortgages" applies to contractors who are buying land, and not to home-buyers.
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Nov 2008
Posts: 490
Schools: Fuqua
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 278 [1] , given: 15

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2009, 12:58
1
KUDOS
Here are some good explanations for the same question-

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/pos ... tml#p23863

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/post7061.html#p7061

In the case of answering the Flaw in the reasoning questions, identify what is the conclusion and then check whether the flaw(one of the ans choices) if it is exposed will WEAKEN the conclusion. If so then it is correct ans.
Intern
Joined: 22 Aug 2009
Posts: 19
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 9

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2009, 16:21
Thanks for the links, mrsmarthi. It is all clear now.

mrsmarthi wrote:
Here are some good explanations for the same question-

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/pos ... tml#p23863

http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/post7061.html#p7061

In the case of answering the Flaw in the reasoning questions, identify what is the conclusion and then check whether the flaw(one of the ans choices) if it is exposed will WEAKEN the conclusion. If so then it is correct ans.
Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2008
Posts: 169
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 39

Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2009, 22:18
imo -a agree with jivan
Re: Construction Boom - GMAT Manhattan Question   [#permalink] 04 Oct 2009, 22:18
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Weaken Revision: Recently in City X, developers have stopped 3 18 Feb 2015, 23:03
15 Recently in City X, residential developers have stopped 10 23 Sep 2012, 10:54
Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, 11 08 Dec 2009, 15:00
The newly renovated housing development in city X is 6 01 Dec 2007, 05:41
Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, 6 03 Sep 2007, 13:37
Display posts from previous: Sort by