The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 01:16

### 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

# The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 193
Schools: ABCD
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 173 [1] , given: 78

The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2012, 05:33
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

71% (02:23) correct 29% (01:35) wrong based on 634 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee. However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly. Therefore, the price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer.

The argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

A. Process regular coffee costs more than processing decaffeinated coffee.
B. Price differences between products can generally be accounted for by such factors as supply and demand, not by differences in production costs.
C. There is little competition among companies that process decaffeinated coffee.
D. Retail coffee-sellers do not expect that consumers are content to pay more for decaffeinated coffee than for regular coffee.
E. The beans used for producing decaffeinated coffee do not cost much more before processing than the beans used for producing regular coffee.

There is no doubt about OA.

(Got this from a forum) - The book says that D is a weakener. Can you please explain why? In my opinion, D has no effect because it denies the 'possibility' (shopkeepers think) of supply-demand influencing the prices. Essentially, it's a mild strengthener - similar to those EXCEPT questions.
Thoughts?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7119
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2129

Kudos [?]: 13627 [5] , given: 222

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2013, 20:37
5
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Archit143 wrote:
Cannot understand why is B not a correct answer. Its defender model as far as i understand.
Retail Cost of X is higher, that does not Cost in providing will be higher.
B says Higher retail cost is because of y,z but not because of cost providing

Pls help me
Archit

Premises:
The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee.
However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly.

Conclusion: The price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer.

Understand here what the conclusion is. It is that greater cost of providing decaf coffee does not lead to the price difference.
This means the author wants to say that there is another factor at play because of which price of decaf is high. That 'other factor' could be anything other than cost of providing decaf coffee.
Option (b) tells you that 'supply and demand' forces set the prices, not the cost of providing the product. This strengthens the author's argument. It is one of the 'other factors'. The option is telling you that yes, there is an 'other factor' which accounts for the greater price of decaf.

Now, what could be the assumption here? What do we need to be true to say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not higher?
The argument already tells us that the process of decaf is simple and not expensive. But it doesn't say anything about raw material cost. When the author says 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee', it includes both raw material and process cost. He only tells us that process cost is not high. He is assuming that the raw material cost is also not high. Only then can he say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not high and that some other factor is at play which sets the price of decaf coffee high.

So (E) is the assumption.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manhattan GMAT Instructor Joined: 08 May 2012 Posts: 51 Location: United States GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47 Followers: 267 Kudos [?]: 315 [1] , given: 4 Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably h [#permalink] ### Show Tags 31 Jul 2012, 10:19 1 This post received KUDOS Expert's post voodoochild wrote: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee. However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly. Therefore, the price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer. The argument relies on assuming which one of the following? A. Process regular coffee costs more than processing decaffeinated coffee. B. Price differences between products can generally be accounted for by such factors as supply and demand, not by differences in production costs. C. There is little competition among companies that process decaffeinated coffee. D. Retail coffee-sellers do not expect that consumers are content to pay more for decaffeinated coffee than for regular coffee. E. The beans used for producing decaffeinated coffee do not cost much more before processing than the beans used for producing regular coffee. There is no doubt about OA. (Got this from a forum) - The book says that D) is a weakener. Can you please explain why? In my opinion, D) has no effect because it denies the 'possibility' (shopkeepers think) of supply-demand influencing the prices. Essentially, it's a mild strengthener - similar to those EXCEPT questions. Thoughts? Here's a useful trick for testing whether a statement weakens or strengthens – look at the opposite statement! Sometimes the relevance of the opposite (or negation) of a statement is easier to discern. In this case, we have (not D) Retail coffee-sellers do expect that consumers are content to pay more for decaf... Well if that's the case, then retailers can get away with charging more and it has nothing to do with the cost of decaffeinating the coffee. So, (not D) is definitely relevant and definitely strengthens the argument. It must be the case that (D) then weakens. Hope that helps! _________________ Mark Sullivan | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Seattle, WA Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile Manhattan GMAT Instructor Joined: 08 May 2012 Posts: 51 Location: United States GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47 Followers: 267 Kudos [?]: 315 [1] , given: 4 Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably h [#permalink] ### Show Tags 31 Jul 2012, 10:21 1 This post received KUDOS Expert's post Follow-up note to my previous comment: Negating a statement can sometimes be confusing and always time-consuming, so this is a technique you should only use when you are down to just a couple choices and really can't make a decision. But, in those scenarios I find it pretty useful. Cheers, Mark _________________ Mark Sullivan | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Seattle, WA Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile Senior Manager Joined: 07 Nov 2012 Posts: 346 Schools: LBS '14 (A) GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48 Followers: 191 Kudos [?]: 366 [1] , given: 4 Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink] ### Show Tags 27 Mar 2013, 00:45 1 This post received KUDOS Hi Archit, I agree, B is a tricky one. Here is how I figured it out... The key is in looking at what the argument actually is: Therefore, the price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer. What does this rely on? Here is B B. Price differences between products can generally be accounted for by such factors as supply and demand, not by differences in production costs. If you look at the two bold sentences together in isolation it becomes clearer that the second one is NOT an assumption of the first. That the price difference can not be accounted for because of one factor, is not dependent on a different reason for price difference. Hope that helps.. james _________________ Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0 ... and more Senior Manager Joined: 07 Nov 2012 Posts: 346 Schools: LBS '14 (A) GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48 Followers: 191 Kudos [?]: 366 [1] , given: 4 Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink] ### Show Tags 27 Mar 2013, 09:19 1 This post received KUDOS Hi, I disagree with you. If you think about producing anything, there are 2 costs that matter: 1) Raw materials 2) Cost of the process So if we know that the process costs the same the only other thing that can affect the production cost is the raw materials. So if we know that the raw materials (coffee beans) cost the same, then we can be sure that the production costs are equal for decaffinated and caffinated coffee. Hope that makes sense. james _________________ Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0 ... and more Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 7119 Location: Pune, India Followers: 2129 Kudos [?]: 13627 [1] , given: 222 Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink] ### Show Tags 02 Aug 2015, 21:42 1 This post received KUDOS Expert's post rohitd80 wrote: VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: Archit143 wrote: Cannot understand why is B not a correct answer. Its defender model as far as i understand. Retail Cost of X is higher, that does not Cost in providing will be higher. B says Higher retail cost is because of y,z but not because of cost providing Pls help me Archit Premises: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee. However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly. Conclusion: The price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer. Understand here what the conclusion is. It is that greater cost of providing decaf coffee does not lead to the price difference. This means the author wants to say that there is another factor at play because of which price of decaf is high. That 'other factor' could be anything other than cost of providing decaf coffee. Option (b) tells you that 'supply and demand' forces set the prices, not the cost of providing the product. This strengthens the author's argument. It is one of the 'other factors'. The option is telling you that yes, there is an 'other factor' which accounts for the greater price of decaf. Now, what could be the assumption here? What do we need to be true to say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not higher? The argument already tells us that the process of decaf is simple and not expensive. But it doesn't say anything about raw material cost. When the author says 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee', it includes both raw material and process cost. He only tells us that process cost is not high. He is assuming that the raw material cost is also not high. Only then can he say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not high and that some other factor is at play which sets the price of decaf coffee high. So (E) is the assumption. Hi Karishma, Thanks for the most lucid, terse and understandable explanation on this CR question! One additional question: B & E are both assumptions...So the best justification to select E over B is that E is more relevant and makes sense (base on cost to provide to coonsumer = raw material + process costs respectively... And that B, although an assumption, but is more far fetched than E? In other words, if E was not provided and was replaced by another completely irrelevant answer choice, B would've been the number one choice? Thanks! No, (B) is not an assumption. It is a strengthener. Note the difference between an assumption and a strengthener. An assumption is a special type of strengthener. It makes the argument stronger and is also necessary for the argument to be true. Any random strengthener is not necessary for the argument to be true. An assumption, if negated makes it impossible for the conclusion to hold. You need (E) to be true for the argument to hold. If it weren't and if the raw material cost in case of decaffeinated coffee was much higher, the author's argument would fail. Read the argument again after assuming that raw material for decaffeinated coffee is much higher. The argument makes no sense now. On the other hand, (B) is not necessary. The other factor could be supply demand but it could be something else as well. It is not necessary that supply demand should set the price for our argument to hold. The argument only says that there is some other factor. It could as well be something else. Read the argument after assuming that supply demand does not set the price. Can the argument still hold? Sure. Something else could set the price. Hence, in any case, (B) will not be the answer. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 3552
Location: India
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 1509

Kudos [?]: 11810 [0], given: 1861

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2012, 07:22
Retail coffee-sellers do not expect that consumers are content to pay more for decaffeinated coffee than for regular coffee.
I think if retailers thought consumers wont agree to pay higher prices, it would charge less for decaf
though this option is waaay out of scope.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 193
Schools: ABCD
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 78

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2012, 19:46
MarkSullivan wrote:
Follow-up note to my previous comment:

Negating a statement can sometimes be confusing and always time-consuming, so this is a technique you should only use when you are down to just a couple choices and really can't make a decision. But, in those scenarios I find it pretty useful.

Cheers,
Mark

Mark,
Thanks for your reply. However, I am not sure how retailers' expectation has got anything to do with the prices! For instance, a gas station could *expect* customers to pay $5K/gallon. However, that's not how the real prices are assigned. There is an economics to it. I, as a customer, could expect to pay only$0.01/gallon for the gas. What effect does it have on the gas prices? Nothing.

Am I correct?

Thanks
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 135
Location: United States
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 5

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2012, 12:33
voodoochild wrote:
The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee. However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly. Therefore, the price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer.

The argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

A. Process regular coffee costs more than processing decaffeinated coffee.
B. Price differences between products can generally be accounted for by such factors as supply and demand, not by differences in production costs.
C. There is little competition among companies that process decaffeinated coffee.
D. Retail coffee-sellers do not expect that consumers are content to pay more for decaffeinated coffee than for regular coffee.
E. The beans used for producing decaffeinated coffee do not cost much more before processing than the beans used for producing regular coffee.

There is no doubt about OA.

(Got this from a forum) - The book says that D) is a weakener. Can you please explain why? In my opinion, D) has no effect because it denies the 'possibility' (shopkeepers think) of supply-demand influencing the prices. Essentially, it's a mild strengthener - similar to those EXCEPT questions.

Thoughts?

OA is fine.

Conclusion - Price difference is not due to the decaffeinating process, yet price is high.
D says - Retailers do not expect customers to pay more for this high-priced coffee. In such a case, the retailers would not be selling the decaff. coffee at a higher rate. That means, if they do not expect customers to buy decaff. coffee at such a high rate, it implies that the retailers don't perceive decaff. coffee to be so specially sold - Rather, high-pricing of decaff. coffee is unintentional and is probably a cause of the expensive decaff. process.
I cannot call this a complete weakener. The alternate cause is not clearly given in this choice. So, if its the same cause as given in the premise, it is a weakener, else, OOS.

Thanks.
VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1096
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 37

Kudos [?]: 526 [0], given: 70

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Mar 2013, 08:33
Cannot understand why is B not a correct answer. Its defender model as far as i understand.
Retail Cost of X is higher, that does not Cost in providing will be higher.
B says Higher retail cost is because of y,z but not because of cost providing

Pls help me
Archit
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 60
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 19

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2013, 09:16
Please explain why E is OA.

The fact that the beans used to produce decaf do not cost much more than the beans used to produce reg coffee is irrelevant. What is relevant is the cost of both processes, not cost of beans used in the process.
_________________

MV
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing.” ― George S. Patton Jr

Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 60
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 19

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2013, 09:27
Good point James, very well said.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

MV
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing.” ― George S. Patton Jr

BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 574
GPA: 3.4
WE: General Management (Non-Profit and Government)
Followers: 106

Kudos [?]: 839 [0], given: 319

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2013, 07:32
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Bumping for review and further discussion*.

_________________

General Mistakes to Avoid on the GMAT
TOP 10 articles on Time Management on the GMAT
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

Rules for posting on the verbal forum

Intern
Joined: 23 Dec 2014
Posts: 23
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 5

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2015, 07:40
Quit tricky but I say E, because the conclusion is that the d. Coffee does not Cost more and the premise is that the process is not much more expensive. So the assumption is that everything involving d. Coffee does not cost much more than regular coffee
Intern
Joined: 24 Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 131

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2015, 21:08
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Archit143 wrote:
Cannot understand why is B not a correct answer. Its defender model as far as i understand.
Retail Cost of X is higher, that does not Cost in providing will be higher.
B says Higher retail cost is because of y,z but not because of cost providing

Pls help me
Archit

Premises:
The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably higher than that of regular coffee.
However, the process by which coffee beans are decaffeinated is fairly simple and not very costly.

Conclusion: The price difference cannot be accounted for by the greater cost of providing decaffeinated coffee to consumer.

Understand here what the conclusion is. It is that greater cost of providing decaf coffee does not lead to the price difference.
This means the author wants to say that there is another factor at play because of which price of decaf is high. That 'other factor' could be anything other than cost of providing decaf coffee.
Option (b) tells you that 'supply and demand' forces set the prices, not the cost of providing the product. This strengthens the author's argument. It is one of the 'other factors'. The option is telling you that yes, there is an 'other factor' which accounts for the greater price of decaf.

Now, what could be the assumption here? What do we need to be true to say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not higher?
The argument already tells us that the process of decaf is simple and not expensive. But it doesn't say anything about raw material cost. When the author says 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee', it includes both raw material and process cost. He only tells us that process cost is not high. He is assuming that the raw material cost is also not high. Only then can he say that 'cost of providing decaffeinated coffee' is not high and that some other factor is at play which sets the price of decaf coffee high.

So (E) is the assumption.

Hi Karishma,

Thanks for the most lucid, terse and understandable explanation on this CR question!

B & E are both assumptions...So the best justification to select E over B is that E is more relevant and makes sense (base on cost to provide to coonsumer = raw material + process costs respectively... And that B, although an assumption, but is more far fetched than E? In other words, if E was not provided and was replaced by another completely irrelevant answer choice, B would've been the number one choice?

Thanks!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10527
Followers: 917

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2016, 18:11
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.
Re: The retail price of decaffeinated coffee is considerably   [#permalink] 13 Oct 2016, 18:11
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 An online retailer 5 27 Oct 2015, 21:09
6 Online retail giant Amazon.com has joined the price war of 11 17 Jan 2014, 05:07
4 Many retailers advertise price-matching policies, such as, 9 12 Nov 2012, 10:44
A discount retailer... 2 28 Feb 2010, 09:28
Carl s Coffee Emporium stocks only two decaffeinated 0 01 Jul 2009, 00:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by