Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 08:19 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 08:19
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
505-555 Level|   Weaken|                                 
User avatar
AnishPassi
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
661
 [3]
Given Kudos: 18
Status:GMAT Coach
Affiliations: The GMAT Co.
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Posts: 112
Kudos: 661
 [3]
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 07 Oct 2022, 21:55
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi jabhatta2,

Quote:

Well, then how is option (d) an alternative explanation ?
Show more

Passage: Bought 10 tickets in advance --> Higher chance of losing awareness of the cost --> Higher chance of no-show
Option D: Bought 10 tickets in advance --> Higher chance that something or the other comes up in between - life happens (further explanation in my solution) --> Higher chance of no-show

We didn’t know earlier when the individual tickets were bought.


Quote:

Then option (d) would not be telling us anything new

option (d) would be an inference if we already knew 'the awareness customers retain' is being driven by "In Advance"
Show more

I don’t follow this bit. Elaborate?
User avatar
AnishPassi
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
661
 [2]
Given Kudos: 18
Status:GMAT Coach
Affiliations: The GMAT Co.
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Posts: 112
Kudos: 661
 [2]
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 17 Oct 2022, 11:16
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AnishPassi
The Story

A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people who bought tickets to individual plays had a no-show rate of less than 1 percent, while those who paid in advance for all ten plays being performed that summer had a no-show rate of nearly 30 percent.

No-show rates of two groups of people for a particular theater festival are compared.
  • Individual-ticket buyers: No-show rate of <1%
  • Advance ticket buyers for all ten plays: No-show rate of ~30%

This may be at least in part because the greater the awareness customers retain about the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it.

“This” – The significant difference in the no-show rates between the two groups.
“May be” – we’re given a potential reason
“At least in part” – it is a partial reason

What’s the partial, potential reason for the 1% v/s 30% no-show rates?

More the people recall the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it.

How is this a potential reason for the 30x difference in the no-show rates?

The author must be thinking that if people have bought tickets for the 10 shows in advance, they are less likely to retain awareness about their cost, and thus they are less likely to use them. That could be a reason for the 30x no-show rate for the advance buyers.

(I guess that’s what happened with me and my annual gym membership.)


Gap(s) in logic

  • Do we know that people who paid in advance for all ten plays are more likely to forget about the cost of the tickets?
  • Maybe buying in advance got the buyers deep discounts. E.g. maybe they got 10 tickets for the price of 5. And so, even if they watch 6-7 plays (no-shows to the rest) the advance payment makes financial sense.


Question Stem


Which of the following would, if true, best serve as an alternative explanation of the results of the study?

We’re looking for an alternate explanation of the results of the study.

    1. What are the results of the study?
    The no-show rates.
      a. <1% for people who bought tickets to individual plays
      b. ~30% for people who bought tickets to all the ten plays in advance

    2. What is the given explanation?
    People who buy tickets in advance are more likely to forget the cost of the tickets → The more likely people are to forget the cost of a ticket, the less likely they are to use it.

    3. What do they mean by ‘an alternative explanation’?
    What else could explain why the no-show rates were so starkly different? That’s what we’ll look for in the answer choices. What else could explain why in one case no-show rates are negligible (<1%) and why they are so high (30%) in the other case.

    4. What could be an alternative explanation?
    I’ve mentioned one alternative explanation above (second point under ‘gaps’).

Another one I can think of: Maybe at the time of buying the ten tickets, the customers were enthusiastic, but later on they got tied up in life and did not attend many plays. (My gym membership 🙁 )

There could be other explanations for the results as well. These are what I could think of. Let’s head on to the answer choices.


Answer choice analysis


(A) The price per ticket was slightly cheaper for those who bought all ten tickets in advance.
Incorrect.
This answer choice is the opposite of a potential alternative reason. Had the price difference been significant, I’d have believed that that could have been a reason for the much higher no-show rates for the advance buyers.

But if the tickets are only “slightly cheaper” for the advance buyers, the people who bought the ten tickets in advance did not get significant cost-savings. So I don’t see how this could be a potential reason for the much-higher no-show rate.
Show more


Replying to a PM:
Quote:
In choice A, even if it were significantly cheaper, dont you think it would stilll be in line with the conclusion that they are aware about costs and hence did not attend all the ten plays because they know it was very cheap whereas the individual ones are expensive . So even if choice said 'significantly cheaper' could it really be a correct answer? Wouldn't it not be correct then also and hence not for an alternate explanation?
Show more

I believe with the word 'significantly' instead of 'slightly' the answer choice would be correct.

What's the current explanation?
Quote:
This may be at least in part because the greater the awareness customers retain about the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it.
Show more

Essentially, the author believes that the people who paid in advance for all ten plays retain lesser awareness about the cost of the plays, and that's why they're less likely to attend the plays.

If we now learn that on buying tickets in bulk the buyers got deep discounts, I'd think that the reason those people had a higher no-show rate is related to a financial calculation, and not their memory.

e.g.
Say, Price/ play is $10.
And say, the price for buying tickets to the 10 plays in advance is $30.

So, a consumer might think: as long as I watch 3 out the 10 plays, I'll not lose any money. If I watch even one more than three, I'll save money. So, let me go ahead and buy tickets in bulk - even though I don’t intend to attend more than 4 or 5 plays.


So, I'd think that the reason for higher no-show is not related to memory (as mentioned in the passage) but to this financial calculation. (May be such buyers never even intended to attend more than 3 - 4 plays.)

Makes sense?
User avatar
Rhaenyra
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2022
Last visit: 19 May 2024
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
8
Given Kudos: 11
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V46
GMAT 2: 770 Q50 V46
Posts: 14
Kudos: 8
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 07 Nov 2022, 23:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone please explain to me why (A) is not the answer? (D) seems like a strengthener/reinforcer to me

Argument is "This may be at least in part because the greater the awareness customers retain about the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it."

So because advance buyers buy the tickets in advance, they retain less awareness than customers for individual plays. And THAT's why they have a higher drop out rate.

(D) says those who buy individual tickets do so right before the play starts. Well, doesn't that reinforce the argument then? Because they buy it so close to the play, they retain the most awareness of the cost. Whereas (A) seems to give the ALTERNATE explanation that the reason advance ticket customers have a higher drop out rate is because their tickets were cheaper. Which means their incentive to show up and recoup the value of the ticket was less. This option attributes the difference in no-show rates to the difference in costs itself, rather than a difference in people's awareness about the cost which in turn depends on the point in time that the ticket was bought (the earlier it was bought, the less the awareness and vice versa. Cue (D) which speaks to the "vice versa" in question).

It's a bit frustrating because some of these answer choices seem to make no sense (ironic given this is called "critical reasoning"). Or at least the way the question/argument is phrased is rather deceptive.

Ok, I've finished ranting. but could someone still please help me understand this? Much appreciated!
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,886
 [5]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,886
 [5]
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people Updated on: 06 Dec 2022, 22:52
Originally posted by egmat on 06 Dec 2022, 09:24.
Last edited by egmat on 06 Dec 2022, 22:52, edited 1 time in total.
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Rhaenyra
Can someone please explain to me why (A) is not the answer? (D) seems like a strengthener/reinforcer to me

Argument is "This may be at least in part because the greater the awareness customers retain about the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it."

So because advance buyers buy the tickets in advance, they retain less awareness than customers for individual plays. And THAT's why they have a higher drop out rate.

(D) says those who buy individual tickets do so right before the play starts. Well, doesn't that reinforce the argument then? Because they buy it so close to the play, they retain the most awareness of the cost. Whereas (A) seems to give the ALTERNATE explanation that the reason advance ticket customers have a higher drop out rate is because their tickets were cheaper. Which means their incentive to show up and recoup the value of the ticket was less. This option attributes the difference in no-show rates to the difference in costs itself, rather than a difference in people's awareness about the cost which in turn depends on the point in time that the ticket was bought (the earlier it was bought, the less the awareness and vice versa. Cue (D) which speaks to the "vice versa" in question).

It's a bit frustrating because some of these answer choices seem to make no sense (ironic given this is called "critical reasoning"). Or at least the way the question/argument is phrased is rather deceptive.

Ok, I've finished ranting. but could someone still please help me understand this? Much appreciated!
Show more

Hi Rhaenyra,

Not being able to solve CR questions with confidence can get frustrating. Let me try to help.
I will try to answer the queries related to this question and give some pointers that can help you in other CR questions as well.

From your query, it seems that you have understood the passage and the question stem well. So, I will just take note of some key points:
    • Group 1- People who bought tickets to individual plays had a no-show rate of <1%.
      o Note- We don’t know when these people purchased the tickets.
    • Group 2- People who paid in advance for all ten plays being performed that summer had a no-show rate of nearly 30% - 30 times that of the first group.
    • One possible reason for this behavior: Those who bought tickets to individual plays were more aware of the ticket cost than those who bought all ten tickets in advance.
    • The question stem asks us to find an alternate reason to explain this behavior.

With this understanding of the passage and the question stem, we ask our students to Pre-think some possible correct answers. This pre-thinking helps us understand the argument better and hence gives an idea of what the correct choice can convey. The confusion that you faced in this question could have been avoided partly if you had pre-thought some correct answers. Let’s see how:

Let’s think of some scenarios in which Group 1 would be highly likely to attend the play, and Group 2 would not be highly likely to attend the play:
    1. Change in plans:
      Since Group 2 bought tickets in advance, it is possible that their plans will change later – something more urgent comes up, and they are not able to attend the plays. Group 1, on the other hand, may have bought the tickets later- maybe on the spot, so there are fewer chances of any change in plan.
    2. Lack of intent:
      What if many people in Group 2 were not very much interested in plays and bought all tickets under some influence (advertisements/ friends/ offers etc.)? People in Group 1, however, knew which plays exactly they would like to watch and hence bought individual tickets and attended the plays.
    3. Careless Attitude:
      What if people in Group 2 don’t care about the money being spent – even though they are aware of the ticket cost- they decide to buy all tickets while they are not even sure about attending the plays. People in Group 1, on the other hand, spend every penny judiciously and hence buy tickets only if they are sure about attending.

With this understanding, let’s move to Answer Choice Analysis.

Choice A- The price per ticket was slightly cheaper for those who bought all ten tickets in advance.
    Let’s visualize this choice:
      • Price per ticket for a person who bought all tickets in advance was = $50
      • Price per ticket for a person who bought tickets to individual plays was = $51

    Now, your logic that “advance ticket customers have a higher dropout rate because their tickets were cheaper. Which means their incentive to show up and recoup the value of the ticket was less’’ would have been valid had there been a significant price difference. For example:
      • “I just paid a dollar per ticket; I don’t care if it gets wasted.”
          VS.
      • “I paid $50 for every ticket; I should not let it go waste.”

    With a slight difference, the motivation to attend plays may not differ by 30X (less than 1% VS. nearly 30%).
    However, I appreciate that you made an effort to understand this choice and the logic that it is based on. If I had a similar understanding, I would have kept this choice and analysed other choices. On finding a better choice, I would have rejected this one.


So, let’s check choice D now:

Choice D- Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.
    This is where you faltered.
    You are correct in saying that since people bought tickets just before the performance, they would have been more aware of the ticket cost. However, you missed an important aspect.

    You should have asked yourself- will a person buying a ticket right before the play be more likely to attend the play than someone who bought the ticket days ago- Imagine 2 such people and think what the reason behind this higher likelihood can be.

    If you visualize well, you should get the answer.
    The answer will be yes. The person who bought the ticket right before the play is more likely to attend it since he has a lower probability of change in plans (also discussed in Pre-thinking).

    Hence, this choice provides another explanation- the difference in the no-show rate is because people in Group 1 had less likelihood of changes in plan than Group 2, and hence this is the correct choice.

So why were you not able to understand choice D properly?
    As per my analysis, you had a decent understanding of the passage and the question stem. With this, you jumped to answer choice analysis.
    Had choice D been direct, for example, “People who bought individual tickets had less likelihood of change in their plans”, you would have selected it. However, since choice D is not direct, you were unable to interpret choice D correctly, probably because you did not visualize choice D and probably because you did not pre-think alternative explanations. Hence, pre-thinking and visualization could have helped you!

Note: Pre-thinking does not mean that you should come up with the answer given in option choices. It helps you understand the passage and the requirements better, and so analyzing answer choices becomes easier.

Hope that helps,
Kanupriya
User avatar
Mantrix
User avatar
Joined: 13 May 2023
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 163
Own Kudos:
122
 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Location: India
Schools: MiM '26 HEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiM '26 (I) Imperial (I) IESE
GMAT Focus 1: 595 Q87 V75 DI77
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
GPA: 9
Schools: MiM '26 HEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiM '26 (I) Imperial (I) IESE
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
Posts: 163
Kudos: 122
 [1]
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 14 Jan 2025, 21:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
P1: A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people who bought tickets to individual plays had a no-show rate of less than 1 percent,
P2: while those who paid in advance for all ten plays being performed that summer had a no-show rate of nearly 30 percent.
Conclusion: This may be at least in part because the greater the awareness customers retain about the cost of an item, the more likely they are to use it.

Which of the following would, if true, best serve as an alternative explanation of the results of the study?

(A) The price per ticket was slightly cheaper for those who bought all ten tickets in advance. (but still they lost money, no bearing on the conclusion eliminate)

(B) Many people who attended the theater festival believed strongly that they should support it financially.
(Many people those who attend believe that supporting financially, even if they think so, how is that relevant to the no show rates, if they want to support it, then they would might contribute in no show rate, so eliminate)

(C) Those who attended all ten plays became eligible for a partial refund. (so, what? then after they lost money, no bearing on the conclusion, eliminate)

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended. (yes, if the people is purchasing tickets just prior to the performance, they are sure with their timings and the availability that they will attend the performance, rather than those whose bought ticket in advance may be unavailable due to something urgent) (answer)

(E) People who arrived just before the performance began could not be assured of obtaining seats in a preferred location. (this is our of context option, eliminate)
User avatar
NEYR0N
User avatar
Joined: 12 Feb 2025
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 94
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 66
Posts: 94
Kudos: 9
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 11 Sep 2025, 10:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
this is not a weaken the argument question, it is asking for a different explanation to the paradox observed. we aren't trying to undermine a judgement
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,784
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,784
 [1]
A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people 16 Sep 2025, 14:22
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
INprimesItrust
this is not a weaken the argument question, it is asking for a different explanation to the paradox observed. we aren't trying to undermine a judgement
Show more
You're right, this isn't a standard "weaken the argument" question. It's always important to pay attention to the exact details of each question, rather than trying to lump questions into broad categories such as strengthen, weaken, etc., so it's good to see that you are picking up on the distinction!

That said, it is quite common to see standard "weaken the argument" questions where the correct answer choice is in fact an alternative explanation. That's because, by definition, an alternative explanation would replace the given explanation. That's why "weaken" is the most appropriate category for this question: if (D) can in fact replace the given explanation, that could certainly weaken the argument.

It is also possible that (D) AND the given explanation are both valid partial explanations, so you could argue that (D) is not in fact a weakener. The good news is that we don't need to worry about whether (D) is actually a weakener. All that matters is that (D) could replace the explanation provided by the author.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts