V 06 #23 : Retired Discussions [Locked]
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 05 Dec 2016, 22:04

### 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

# V 06 #23

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 29 May 2010
Posts: 7
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2010, 18:57
A negative review of a popular restaurant claimed that the wait staff was rude and the food was overpriced. This review caused sales to drop precipitously which, in turn, forced the original owners to sell the business. The new owners revised the menu and dismissed most of the wait staff. After three months, however, sales had improved by less than 1%.

Which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of why sales at the restaurant have not improved?

The new owners could not determine who were the rudest members of the wait staff.
New menu items offered by the new owners are now more affordable.
The new owners neglected to advertise the fact that the restaurant is now under new management.
The new owners began managing the restaurant during the summer, when sales are unusually high.
Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items opened across the street.

Can anyone explain why A and E also cannot be options giving 'partial explanation' to the paradox ?
The stimulus says The new owners dismissed most of the wait staff. So some of the rude ones (one of the reasons why sales dropped in the first instance) may have been left behind and causing the same issues? So why not A?
Another restaurant with a menu with similar prices is close by, so since the sales gets distributed, hence the sales of this restaurant 'have not improved' ?

The OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
C
which is also a possibility, but why not A and E ?

Thank you
Senior Manager
Status: Time to step up the tempo
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 408
Location: Milky way
Schools: ISB, Tepper - CMU, Chicago Booth, LSB
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 195 [1] , given: 50

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2010, 20:02
1
KUDOS
hitmis wrote:
A negative review of a popular restaurant claimed that the wait staff was rude and the food was overpriced. This review caused sales to drop precipitously which, in turn, forced the original owners to sell the business. The new owners revised the menu and dismissed most of the wait staff. After three months, however, sales had improved by less than 1%.

Which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of why sales at the restaurant have not improved?

The new owners could not determine who were the rudest members of the wait staff.
New menu items offered by the new owners are now more affordable.
The new owners neglected to advertise the fact that the restaurant is now under new management.
The new owners began managing the restaurant during the summer, when sales are unusually high.
Another restaurant with similarly-priced menu items opened across the street.

Can anyone explain why A and E also cannot be options giving 'partial explanation' to the paradox ?
The stimulus says The new owners dismissed most of the wait staff. So some of the rude ones (one of the reasons why sales dropped in the first instance) may have been left behind and causing the same issues? So why not A?
Another restaurant with a menu with similar prices is close by, so since the sales gets distributed, hence the sales of this restaurant 'have not improved' ?

The OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
C
which is also a possibility, but why not A and E ?

Thank you

Option A - invalid since the new customers of the restaurant do not have the knowledge of the rude customers and old customers because of their bad experience are not going to turn up. Net result is the change in the restaurant does not reach the market.

Option E is invalid since only the price is discussed and not the quality of the menu items. Option C offers a stronger reason for the paradox and hence it wins.
_________________

Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog

Intern
Joined: 29 May 2010
Posts: 7
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2010, 21:49
Thanks C does make sense since the other two take care of either food prices or rude staff but not both.
Intern
Status: Time to work on the applications
Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 5
Location: United States (IL)
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V36
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

18 Nov 2010, 15:13
I do not agree with C because "New management" doesn't necessarily mean lower prices or a different wait staff. What do you think?
Re: V 06 #23   [#permalink] 18 Nov 2010, 15:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
v06#23 5 18 Nov 2010, 15:07
V06 2 07 Nov 2009, 21:37
1 v06 2 13 Jul 2009, 10:39
V06 Number 21 4 10 Oct 2008, 03:47
v06#11 3 10 Oct 2008, 03:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# V 06 #23

Moderator: Bunuel

 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®.