Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Apr 2014, 06:37

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2012
Posts: 150
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 37

GMAT ToolKit User
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 06 May 2013, 06:03
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

29% (04:34) correct 70% (02:36) wrong based on 243 sessions
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce-they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100- calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.
Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?
A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

I am lost!! Help with reasoning will be highly appreciated
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Please give Kudos if you like the post

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 271
Location: European union
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 37

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 06 May 2013, 12:30
I would say C is a good answer. Busy young profesisonals dont have time to measure calories. so this supports the convenience option. At the same time it undermines the second reason because..one might assume busy young professionals are supposed to have self control...
4 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 983
Location: United States
Followers: 93

Kudos [?]: 938 [4] , given: 116

Premium Member
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 06 May 2013, 16:49
4
This post received
KUDOS
Very tricky question, IMO E is correct.

Fact: 100Calories packs cost more per ounce-than traditionally sized portions.
Fact: Consumers have been purchasing 100Calories pack with greater and greater frequency.

Explanation 1: Consumers are willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. ==> convenience is 1st priority.

Explanation 2: 100Calories pack represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages. ==> Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. However, if 100c pack stands beside a LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore the smaller one and pick up the bigger one.

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
Wrong. Out of scope.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
Wrong. Out of scope.

C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
Wrong. Good shell game. It maybe fits the first explanation, but It's wrong because "the first group to purchase" does not mean busy young professionals will keep their habit. They are just the group of people who always try "NEW stuffs" more frequently than other group of people.

D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
Wrong. Out of scope.

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.
Correct. Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. ==> If 100c pack stands beside LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore 100c pack. ==> E also undermines the 2nd explanation because if convenience is priority, customers should ignore the large sized portions to pick up the smaller sized packs.

Hope it's clear.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMV Chief of Design.

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 15 Oct 2012
Posts: 4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [1] , given: 0

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 04:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
summer101 wrote:
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce-they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100- calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.
Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?
A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

I am lost!! Help with reasoning will be highly appreciated


Interesting question! Let's examine the argument first:
Observation: Though HCPs cost more per ounce than traditional snack packs, they are selling really well.
Reasoning 1: Consumers are probably willing to pay more to avoid measuring out their portions, and are relatively unconcerned about the size of the pack
Reasoning 2: HCPs represent the smallest snack pack sizes that look and feel 'substantial' enough to appeal to dieters without self-control
We need to pick out the answer choice that supports one of the 2 explanations and undermines the other.

A: This is a very specific case - HCPs sold in vending machines versus traditional packs sold in vending machines. Be very wary of such 'too narrow' answer choices. This does not fit our bill.
B: When such foods are consumed - does not help us.
C: This supports Reasoning 1 to some extent - busy professionals may not want the hassle of measuring out their portions. But this does not undermine Reasoning 2.
D: This is an explanation for why the companies that manufacture HCPs must charge more - does not help to strengthen/weaken the 2 explanations.
E: Correct. This choice has a clear connect to the appearance of HCPs, a point mentioned in Reasoning 2. It strengthens Reasoning 2 because it tells us that people may, in fact, be influenced by the 'substantial' feel of the HCPs. By themselves, the HCPs may have looked substantial, but next to traditional snack packs, they would look smaller. This is in line with Reasoning 2. This choice also undermines Reasoning 1: if consumers are willing to pay more to avoid measuring out their portions, this should be the case wherever the HCPs are displayed. But the sales of HCPs is poor when they are displayed next to traditional packs.
Hope this is clear now. :)
Intern
Intern
Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Posts: 44
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 3

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 08 May 2013, 05:17
Analysis of argument:
1. Fast rise in production and sales of "100- Calorie packs” which provides exactly 100 calories per portion.
2. 100- Calorie packs costs more and sells for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions which are 2-3 times 100- Calorie packs.
3. First explanation of the rise in sales of "100- Calorie packs”: Consumers unconcerned with impression of the small packs and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions.
4. Another explanation of the rise in sales of "100- Calorie packs”: At least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, the 100- calorie pack still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.

Pre thinking:
The production of 100- Calorie packs is increasing despite of its high cost of production to the producer while selling at same price as traditional product. So producer must be able to sell large number of these to get more aggregate profit even though profit per unit is less. This becomes irrelevant because we are looking for consumer behavior and not production behavior.
The Sales of 100- Calorie is also on rise despite the fact that it sells for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions which are 2-3 times 100- Calorie packs.
So the consumers are using it increasingly and the only major difference from traditional product s is that the 100- Calorie packs which provides exactly 100 calories per portion.
So the reason for increase must be around the exact 100 calories per portion per portion which it provides.

The first explanation says that consumer is using it more often to avoid measuring out their portions. So the consumer is too busy to measure the portion they eat and can’t eat more than 100 calories.

The second explanation relies on the reason that it is getting popular because of dieters who lack self control and hence chooses 100- calorie pack to limit their consumption.

Answer choice analysis:

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
Incorrect: This is not supporting or undermining the argument but repeating the fact given in passage.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
Incorrect: Not related to any of the explanations. The explanations rely on either not wanting to measure or on dieters without self control.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
Incorrect: Supports the first explanation but doesn’t undermine the second one as it doesn’t say anything about dieters.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
Incorrect: Explanations are not taking about manufacturers but about the users.

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.
Correct
The sales have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions shows that a big section people lack self control and will go for larger sized portion if displayed together. The second explanation talks about this behavior and hence is supported by this answer choice.

It also undermines the first explanation which says that consumer is using it more often to avoid measuring out their portions. Had that been the reason the sales of 100-calorie packs wouldn’t have gone down when displayed with traditional packs.

_________________

The Kudo please :)

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 Sep 2012
Posts: 15
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
GPA: 3.11
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [2] , given: 2

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 17 Jul 2013, 19:29
2
This post received
KUDOS
Please correct me....
I have different understanding

"represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages."


It clearly states that dieters want to go for small packs and limit consumption of larger ones.
D.) small packs are not sold as high as large ones, if both are placed together. This donot undermine the explanation of quoted text as dieters would still prefer smaller ones(because they cannot control eating and same time want to limit their eating).
So, D is not the answer.

Even wague , B successfully eliminates the explanation that peopl go for small packs for convenience. If a larger number of consumer take small packs because they are already full after heavy meal, the second explanation is supported and first is undermnined
Intern
Intern
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 12
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 294

CAT Tests
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2013, 20:35
mbmanoj wrote:
D.) small packs are not sold as high as large ones, if both are placed together. This donot undermine the explanation of quoted text as dieters would still prefer smaller ones(because they cannot control eating and same time want to limit their eating).
So, D is not the answer.

Even wague , B successfully eliminates the explanation that peopl go for small packs for convenience. If a larger number of consumer take small packs because they are already full after heavy meal, the second explanation is supported and first is undermnined

I also feel the answer should be B
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 5
Concentration: Operations, General Management
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 3

CAT Tests
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink] New post 18 Apr 2014, 04:56
how E undermines second??
E is undermining first explanation
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the   [#permalink] 18 Apr 2014, 04:56
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Popular new posts Movies you have seen recently faifai0714 34 11 Oct 2006, 09:35
Popular new posts 5 Many of the convenience foods on the market today, like dry rohitgoel15 17 23 Aug 2010, 10:47
New posts In North america there has been an explosion of public yvonne0923 2 25 Apr 2011, 17:25
Popular new posts 9 Experts publish their posts in the topic In North America there has been an explosion of public imhimanshu 19 15 May 2012, 05:16
New posts 5 Experts publish their posts in the topic In North America there has been an explosion of public carcass 9 28 Mar 2013, 15:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.