Six months or so after getting a video recorder, many early buyers apparently lost interest in
obtaining videos to watch on it. The trade of businesses selling and renting videos is still
buoyant, because the number of homes with video recorders is still growing. But clearly, once
the market for video recorders is saturated, businesses distributing videos face hard times.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
(A) The market for video recorders would not be considered saturated until there was one in 80
percent of homes. - this would weeken the argumentif we knw for sure tht one in 80 situation is not atainable.
(B) Among the items handled by video distributors are many films specifically produced as
video features. doesnt matter wht they deal wth video features,games etc,
(C) Few of the early buyers of video recorders raised any complaints about performance
aspects of the new product. the argument doesnt say the early recorders lost interest as the pieces were faulty, out of scopr IMO
(D) The early buyers of a novel product are always people who are quick to acquire novelties,
but also often as quick to tire of them. the argument generalises a priciple applicable to some part of users to the entire community. this answer correctly points out tht flaw.early users loosing interets doesnt mean evryone one wud discard using thm.
(E) In a shrinking market, competition always intensifies and marginal businesses fail. this stregthens the conclusion
The only place where success comes before work is in the dictionary.
If my post made you think, KUDO it. Its easy :D