A minority but influential investor in Quell has recently claimed that

Seems D here. What's the OA?

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

A minority but influential investor in Quell has recently claimed that the company's stock is undervalued, citing as evidence the announced plan of Quell's CEO, who is the majoirity shareholder, to sell the company in a short period of time. According to the minority investor, the CEO is permitting or even encouraging an undervalued stock price so that he may get the company sold and liquidate his stake in the company. By accusing the CEO of having personal motives allow the stock price to become distorted, however, the minority investor is guilty of the precise accusation that he himself is making. This investor is known for using his influence to attempt to sway public opinion and meddle in otherwise well-calibrated deals in order to drive up share prices for his personal financial benefit.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(a) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides reasoning to undermine the support for the position being opposed.
(b) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is reasoning that has been used to support the position being opposed
(c) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole
(d) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that reasoning.
(e) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

A minority but influential investor in Quell has recently claimed that the company's stock is undervalued, citing as evidence the announced plan of Quell's CEO, who is the majoirity shareholder, to sell the company in a short period of time. According to the minority investor, the CEO is permitting or even encouraging an undervalued stock price so that he may get the company sold and liquidate his stake in the company. By accusing the CEO of having personal motives allow the stock price to become distorted, however, the minority investor is guilty of the precise accusation that he himself is making. This investor is known for using his influence to attempt to sway public opinion and meddle in otherwise well-calibrated deals in order to drive up share prices for his personal financial benefit.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(a) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides reasoning to undermine the support for the position being opposed.
(b) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is reasoning that has been used to support the position being opposed
(c) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole
(d) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that reasoning.
(e) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

I agree. I could not find any indication / reasoning that the passage as a whole opposes (or supports) the claim that " the company's stock is undervalued". The minority investor thinks that the stock is undervalued. But there is no statement in the passage that shows that the author of the passage opposes (or aligns with) the minority investor on this point.

All we can deduce is that the author blames the investor for the same reason that the investor blames the CEO - that the investor is trying to drive up the stock price. It is not clear whether the author agrees ( or disagrees) that the stockprice is undervalued.

A minority but influential investor in Quell has recently claimed that the company's stock is undervalued, citing as evidence the announced plan of Quell's CEO, who is the majority shareholder, to sell the company in a short period of time. According to the minority investor, the CEO is permitting or even encouraging an undervalued stock price so that he may get the company sold and liquidate his stake in the company. By accusing the CEO of having personal motives allow the stock price to become distorted, however, the minority investor is guilty of the precise accusation that he himself is making. This investor is known for using his influence to attempt to sway public opinion and meddle in otherwise well-calibrated deals in order to drive up share prices for his personal financial benefit.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?


(A) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides reasoning to undermine the support for the position being opposed.

(B) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is reasoning that has been used to support the position being opposed.

(C) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

(D) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that reasoning.

(E) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

A minority but influential investor in Quell has recently claimed that the company's stock is undervalued, citing as evidence the announced plan of Quell's CEO, who is the majority shareholder, to sell the company in a short period of time. According to the minority investor, the CEO is permitting or even encouraging an undervalued stock price so that he may get the company sold and liquidate his stake in the company. By accusing the CEO of having personal motives allow the stock price to become distorted, however, the minority investor is guilty of the precise accusation that he himself is making. This investor is known for using his influence to attempt to sway public opinion and meddle in otherwise well-calibrated deals in order to drive up share prices for his personal financial benefit.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?


(A) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides reasoning to undermine the support for the position being opposed.

(B) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is reasoning that has been used to support the position being opposed.

(C) The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.

(D) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that reasoning.

(E) The first is reasoning that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.