Sometimes I worder if you have a strategy to attck the question and nont only saying: need explanation of the answer choices.

Back to your question

The brochure for “Sailboat Sellers Inc.” indicates that sailboats manufactured before 1990 are more likely to have retained their original finish, polish, and detailing than those manufactured in 1990 or later.

The company worked better before a certain date than after

Therefore, sailboat manufacturers were more attentive to producing higher-quality, durable sailboats before 1990 than was the case subsequently.

Conclusion: the products before 1990 was better in quality that after 1990

Which of the following, if true, would serve to cast doubt on this conclusion?


A) The level of resources dedicated to the manufacturing process of sailboats is generally much higher than that for most other manufactured goods.

The level of resources dedicated by the company to the other manufactures is irrelevant

B) Sailboats built after 1990 are generally larger, spend more time at sea, and accommodate more people per use than those built before 1990.

The items built after 1990 is irrelevant. Moreover, we care about quality not the size per se

C) The materials used by sailboat manufacturers before 1990 were not significantly different from those used after 1990.

The materials (so the quality of the process to manufact the items) are the same and not better before or after 1990. Correct

D) The average time to manufacture a sailboat has declined significantly since 1990.

The average time is irrelevant

E) Re-finishing, polishing, and detailing a sailboat is very costly, leading many owners to trade in their sailboats for a replacement or buy a new one as opposed to repairing the original.

Completely out od scope

C is the answer
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

@Aditya...B indeed is the official answer I was caught up between B and D only to realize that D actually strengthen the argument ...Thanks!! for your insight

I think B should be the answer.

B tells us that Sailboats made after 1990 spend more time at sea and hence more wear and tear happens so these sailboats do not able to retain the original finish, polish, etc. And therefore attention of manufacturers does not matter. And, so, B weaken the argument.

Please advise whether I am right?

@kapsycumm.. No C doesn't weaken the conclusion or else it would have been a contender for the right answer (Its a weaken the argument question)...it in fact strengthens the conclusion by dismissing an alternate cause that might have caused the difference in quality

Sorry, I meant to say "strenghten"..but, you get the point

Carcass..I apologize if my post was too strong. I was replying from my phone.

i will analyse the arguement first before going to the evaluation..the finding of the brochure is that sailboats manufactured before 1990 were of high qaulity and more durable than those manufacture after 1990..the arguement further makes a conclusion that before-1990 sailboats were particularly better than the after-1990 sailboats ..the only way we can cast doubt on this conclusion is to show that nothing has necessarily changed in the making of the boats from before 1990 and after and hence the sailboats must be of the same qaulitx value..only C is favourable for an option..c directly states that the same material that was used to build the high quality and durable sailboats before 1990 is the one that has remained for use until after 1990