A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people

Question

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. 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.

(B) Many people who attended the theater festival believed strongly that they should support it financially.

(C) Those who attended all ten plays became eligible for a partial refund.

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.

(E) People who arrived just before the performance began could not be assured of obtaining seats in a preferred location.

ID - CR07809

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Accepted Answer

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. 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.
(B) Many people who attended the theater festival believed strongly that they should support it financially.
(C) Those who attended all ten plays became eligible for a partial refund.
(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended. 
(E) People who arrived just before the performance began could not be assured of obtaining seats in a preferred location.

EMPOWER  gmat  Enhanced Explanation:

Type  :  Weaken (asked in a rather creative manner) 
  Boil It Down  :  Awareness of cost -> More likely to use 
  Missing Information  :  An alternative cause 
  Goal  :   This question is asking us for an alternative cause to the one given, and is there by asking us to effectively weaken the explanation given. One particularly obvious explanation has to do with when these different groups by tickets. The farther in advance, the greater the chance that something might come up.

Ⓐ  This is a 180 option. If the package includes a slight discount, then that would further reinforce the explanation given that the awareness of cost is to blame. The more expensive, the more likely they are to attend, and vice versa.

Ⓑ  This option raises a factor that’s applicable to both the individual ticket purchasers and the 10 pack purchasers, and thus provides no alternative explanation.

Ⓒ  Another 180 option. This option says that those who ATTEND ALL 10 plays become eligible for a partial refund; therefore, this option would provide a rationale for people to attend ALL of the plays. We need an alternative rationale as to why they didn’t attend all 10 plays. As an aside, if they have to attend all 10 to then be eligible for a partial refund, I’m not exactly sure what they’d be refunded for since they've already gone, but nonetheless, this option definitely doesn’t give us an alternative cause.

Ⓓ  Here we go. This option explains that those who purchase tickets to attend individual plays are right there and ready to watch the show. Well, that definitely explains why individual show purchasers have an attendance rate that is so much higher. These are people who are there, and ready to watch that particular play right then.

Ⓔ  The seat people are sit in doesn’t clearly appear to be linked to no-show rates. Additionally, this option actually doesn’t specify which type of ticket holder the option is referring to: single or 10 pack holders? In that sense this option is a wash.

LogicGuru1 · Answer

Answer is D

See this analogy

First Case :- You are about to reach Times Square to attend a protest against demolition of poor people's houses by a big corporation that wants to build a hotel at that location. But before coming to the protest you drank 2 litre of water and now you also need to pee urgently. Your bladder is about to burst. So while moving towards the protest area you suddenly see a pay and use Toilet-Facility on your right hand side of the road. You run to it and pay 10 cent, go inside and pee.
What are the chances that you will not pee after seeing the toilet or after paying for the 10 cent..... very less !!! Right ?

Another case:- Your parents have given you 20 McDonald Happy Hour Coupons that are valid for one whole year. What are the chances that you will run to your nearest McDonald to use those coupons as soon as you receive them ? Not as high as the urgent "I need to pee" case.

Now let us look at this problem in hand :- You reach theater at the last minute. You shout at the clerk at the box office:- "Hey man.. has the show started". He says "Not yet but it is about to start in 2 minutes". You say "Give me a ticket" and then you run inside to grab a seat. You are unlikely to miss a show that you have come to see at the last minute, with the sole purpose of watching it.

This is what option D is saying.

It is presenting to us a very plausible valid reason as to why single ticket buyers don't miss the show.

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.

Now people who had booked the show in advance ( say 2 months before) are more likely to miss the show because they might forget about the show, or might get busy in work or might get some other important task to be done at the same time as the show starts, or might get injured or might leave the city and thus are NOT able to attend the show.

SUCH A THING WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO A PERSON WHO IS AT THE THEATRE JUST BEFORE THE SHOW STARTS AND THEREFORE A PERSON WHO BUYS A TICKET IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO EASH SHOW DOES NOT MISS THAT SHOW AS INDICATED BY ANSWER CHOICE "D"

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.

egmat · Answer

Solution

Passage analysis 
         
 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, 
  A study was conducted on the sales of tickets at a summer theater festival. 
 The findings of the study were:
 1. People who had purchased tickets to a single play almost always turned up to watch the play.
2. Less than 1% of them did not turn up to watch the play

while those who paid in advance for all ten plays being performed that summer had a no-show rate of nearly 30 percent. 
 3. But among people who bought the tickets to all 10 plays in bulk, the drop out rate was almost 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. 
  The reason behind this behavior is not completely known. 
 But part of the reason could be that the more people consciously remember the money they spent on something, the more they are likely to put that thing to use.

Prethinking 
 Thought process

We know:

If customers bought single tickets to plays, their no-show rate was <1% 
 If customers bought tickets in bulk and that too in advance, their no-show rate was almost 30%. 
 Tickets bought in bulk would cost the customer more money.

In spite of booking the tickets in advance, and spending more money on the ten plays, the customers are much less likely to attend the show. On the other hand, almost everyone who bought tickets for a single show attended the show.

This is the paradox in the passage that we have to resolve.

Partial explanation given for this paradox is:

The more consciously a customer remembers the cost of the ticket, the less likely he is to waste the ticket.

What explanation will not only explain the paradox, but it will also be in keeping with the partial explanation.

When is a customer likely to be more conscious of the money spent on the ticket?

The less the gap between the buying of the ticket and the using of the ticket.

So,  firstly,  it is possible that the individual play tickets were bought right before the performance and the people who bought them went to the summer festival with the sole intention of watching the show. Their chances of dropping the show, therefore, turned out to be <1%.

Secondly , people who had booked the shows much in advance may have been stalled by some circumstance which they could not or did not foresee at the time of booking the plays in bulk. Thus, many of them ended up having to forgo the shows.

Answer Choice Analysis

A 
This supports the part reason given in the passage. The cost of the ticket being more for the buyers of individual plays, they were less likely to drop out from the show. But truly speaking, if there was only a slight difference in the costs then it may not really matter to the buyers.

Thus, this is not the correct answer choice.

B 
This talks about people feeling strongly about supporting the festival financially and maybe they bought the tickets to the plays for that reason. But this does not explain the difference in the drop out rates of individual ticket buyers and bulk ticket buyers. Their motive of having supported the festival would have been completed by just buying the tickets and the drop out rates should ideally not have been different.

Thus, this is not the correct answer choice.

C 
This explains why people would want to attend the plays – the incentive being the partial refund. But it does not explain why they would opt to drop out.

Thus, this is not the correct answer choice.

D  
This is in line with the first explanation given in the pre-thinking.

Thus, this is the correct answer choice.

E 
This option does not tell us whether these late arrivals were people who had bought tickets to individual plays or all 10 plays.

Thus, this is not the correct answer choice.

manojsundar1 · Answer

i dont think it is a weaken question.it simply states an alternate explanation.If ppl usually bought their ticket before the show,the chances of them showing up is much higher as seen from the <1% stat.So it gives an alternate explanation as to y the no show rate was less than 1%. One reason was cost and the other is the above explanation.

Harley1980 · Answer

Hello  manojsundar1

We have conclusion states that reason is A and we add another reason B but both reason can be present. What does it mean? It means that we don't destroy conclusion but weaken it because we add another possible reason. This is what answers on weaken questions usually do.

manojsundar1 · Answer

Harley1980 
I am still not convinced that the conclusion has been clearly stated.
In the last sentence,it is clearly mentioned"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"
Note the part in Bold.It has given a part of the explanation and Hence not the Conclusion.The question is asking for the other part that could explain the results of the study.
hence,i dont think its a weaken question
what do you think?

Harley1980 · Answer

Yep, looks like you right: this bold part is really weird.

harishbiyani8888 · Answer

Hi,

i didn't understand the question.

Individual plays no show rate is very low less than 1 %, however those who paid in advance for 10 plays, their no show rate is around 30% which is higher.

Now the cause given in the question is that the more awareness about the cost of an item, people will use it. I quite didn't understand how is this linked to the no show rates.

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Answer

Hi harishbiyani8888,

I'd be happy to help. The argument is presenting one explanation as to why the no-show rates, BUT we're asked to find an option that offers an alternative explanation. D provides an alternative: if the people who buy tickets to single plays do so right before the play, they're right there and ready to go, whereas those who purchased tickets well in advance might be more inclined to miss a play since they might be preoccupied.

Sankalp92 · Answer

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.??
what is meant by these lines? its total bouncer to me. please help

egmat · Answer

This just means that people who are paying for individual tickets retain the information about the cost of each play, whereas those who purchase tickets for 10 plays altogether may not.

-Rajat

mallya12 · Answer

Why is option B wrong here??

Those who paid in advance for all 10 plays might be willing to support the festival. The no show rate might be higher because people are not interested in the show but at the same time want to support the festival. Those who bought individual tickets didn't show interest in supporting because the amount contributed was less by a single ticket.

Someone please clarify my doubt

warrior1991 · Answer

hi  mallya12

I am no expert but can help you.

I think you are also assuming that the individual ticket price is less than the price of 10 tickets. What if there were discount going on and the 10 tickets price was lower than the price of one individual show.

Also, what if one individual show was the one that was very popular and that had a price which was more than the combined price of 10 shows(shows that were not that popular).

We have to assume a lot many things. Thus B cannot be an answer.

lindseym · Answer

Hi, I read all replies related to the question, but some ambiguity remains to me..
I understand that awareness could be one reason to the no-show rate, and we should find the alternative explanation apart from awareness..

I thought D is kinda "awareness" because if they bought the tickets earlier, the awareness decreases..
So i found another explanation which is with regard to the Cost, since the cost goes higher people do not tend to lose the opportunity ..

Vegita · Answer

Hi  EMPOWERgmatVerbal

I think I learned something important from this question, and I just wanted to confirm my understanding below.

So we are trying to find an option that best serves as an alternative explanation of the results of the study. However, the study has two results which are as follows:

1. people who bought tickets to individual plays had a no-show rate of less than 1 percent

2. those who paid in advance for all ten plays being performed that summer had a no-show rate of nearly 30 percent

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.

Option D. Although correct, however, only seems to provide an alternative explanation for result 1 and not 2. I have also noticed this happening in weaker/strengthener questions whose conclusion has more than one variable. However, we only need to weaken/strengthen one.

AnishPassi · Answer

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.

(B) Many people who attended the theater festival believed strongly that they should support it financially. 
  Incorrect.   
 Are you thinking that maybe in this case people bought the tickets in advance with never any intention to attend the plays? Maybe they just wanted to support the festival financially.

If you are, that reasoning is wrong.

The answer choice talks about ‘many people who attended the theater festival’. So, anyway we’re talking about people who showed up to attend a play. I don’t see any relation between wanting to support the festival and attending a play at the festival.

Moreover, the same logic could apply to individual-ticket buyers as well. Maybe they bought the tickets to support the festival financially with no intention to attend the plays. This answer choice does not help us understand why the no-show rates are different.

(C) Those who attended all ten plays became eligible for a partial refund. 
  Incorrect.   
 If that’s the case, perhaps the advance buyers would be incentivized to attend all ten plays, no?

Our job is to give an alternative reason for why the no-show rates are so different. All I get from this answer choice is a reason for why the no-show rate for the advance buyers should be low. No explanation for why the rate is 30x the single ticket buyers’ rate.

Moreover, the partial refund would be for anyone who attended all ten plays – individual-ticket-buyer or a bulk-buyer.

(D) Usually, people who bought tickets to individual plays did so immediately prior to each performance that they attended.
   Correct.   
This answer choice tells us when individual-ticket buyers bought their tickets. They usually bought them immediately prior to the performance.

So what?

Well, if I bought the ticket to a play immediately prior to the show, I’ll most probably attend it. The chances of me not attending the play are quite low. I think that’s true for most people.

Compare that with people who bought tickets in advance. We are not explicitly given this, but we can understand that the chance of someone who bought a ticket in advance not showing up would be greater than someone who bought the ticket just before the show.

So this could be an alternative reason for the stark difference in the no-show rates.

(E) People who arrived just before the performance began could not be assured of obtaining seats in a preferred location.
   Incorrect.   
 This answer choice deals with how much before the performance people show up. This would hold true for individual-ticket-buyers and bulk-buyers alike. This answer choice is irrelevant to what’s going on in the passage.

Additional Notes

F. People who bought tickets for ten plays in advance had as much awareness about the cost as did people who bought individual tickets.

Would this answer choice be correct?

No.

We’re looking for an alternative explanation of the significantly different no-show rates.

This option weakens the explanation, however, it doesn’t provide an alternative explanation. Thus, it is wrong.

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  AnishPassi  - i am struggling to interpret the blue exactly.

Is the blue saying -- that if I pay for 10 shows at one shot  in advance

Its not the " In Advance " thats driving this phenomena but instead the  BULK BUYING/Cost Awarness  thats driving this surprising phenomena ?

So the blue is saying :

Bulk Buying ------------------------> LESS awarness of the cost per item -----------> Low show rate
Single buying ----------------------> MORE awareness of the cost per item ---------> High Show rate

Option (D) is saying -- its NOT  bulk buying /  single buying   nor  Less awareness /  More Awareness.

But Instead, its

Advance buying ------------------>Low show rate
Just prior to performance -------->High Show rate

AnishPassi · Answer

Hi jabhatta2,

No, I don’t believe the issue is ‘in advance’ v/s ‘in bulk’.

The passage talks about 'the awareness customers  retain '. I'd still associate that with buying tickets in advance.

D says it is not about awareness, rather, it is about how the chance of showing up is linked with when you bought the ticket(s). If I bought a ticket at the ticket counter just before the show, the chances that I suddenly decide to not attend the play are low.

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi Anish - per the argument , the ' the awareness customers  retain  ' - what is the driver for this ?

I thought ' the awareness customers  retain  ' was being driven by " Bulk buying " - is that inccurate ?

Are you suggesting ' the awareness customers  retain  ' is being driven by other factor, perhaps - 
(i)  In Advance  
OR 
(ii)  We cant figure that out

I dont think the passage is stating ' the awareness customers  retain  ' is being driven by " In Advance "

Why ?

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

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 "

thoughts ?

A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A study of ticket sales at a summer theater festival found that people

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards