GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Oct 2018, 00:17

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V32
A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2012, 04:54
4
11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

46% (02:07) correct 54% (02:11) wrong based on 620 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the number of attendants at the park's entrance gates, claiming the new attendants will alleviate line congestion. The manager reasons that, since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park, and the increased revenue will offset the cost of the extra attendants.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the park manager's reasoning is flawed?

(A) People who leave the current long lines at the entrance already reduce wait times to some degree.

(B) The lines at attractions inside the park already make the average wait times inside considerably longer than those at the entrance.

(C) A majority of people who visit the park have season passes, allowing them to bypass the entrance.

(D) Many visitors opposing the plan have indicated that they prefer congestion at the entrance to potential overcrowding inside the park.

(E) Though the number of attendants will double under the manager's plan, the number of visitors might only increase by 25 percent.

B is actually outside the scope as it talks about lines inside the park. Can some one explain this question. Thanks in advance.

_________________

Regards,
gmatsuperstar

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1184
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Premium Member
Re: A manager at a local theme park - FLAW  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2012, 05:22
4
A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the number of attendants at the park's entrance gates, claiming the new attendants will alleviate line congestion. The manager reasons that, since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park, and the increased revenue will offset the cost of the extra attendants.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the park manager's reasoning is flawed?

(A) People who leave the current long lines at the entrance already reduce wait times to some degree. Out Of Scope. We do not care about people who leave the lines. Our only concern is whether increasing attendants will increase traffic.

(B) The lines at attractions inside the park already make the average wait times inside considerably longer than those at the entrance. If this is true, it would mean that the people attending the theme park will still have to be waiting almost for the same amount of time as before. Only difference is that time that would have been spent waiting at the entrance previously will now be spent waiting at each attraction. So Answer.
(C) A majority of people who visit the park have season passes, allowing them to bypass the entrance. Out of scope. Our concern is only about the people waiting at the entrance.

(D) Many visitors opposing the plan have indicated that they prefer congestion at the entrance to potential overcrowding inside the park. Out of scope. Our concern is only about the waiting time and not congestion or overcrowding.

(E) Though the number of attendants will double under the manager's plan, the number of visitors might only increase by 25 percent. Wont necessarily weaken. The revenues from the tickets can be much greater than the salary for the attendees and hence even a small increase in revenue might easily set off the salaries paid.
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 36
Re: A manager at a local theme park - FLAW  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2012, 06:49
2
I thought C was also in scope but it is talking about different kinds of people. We are concerned with the people that are queueing rather than those who are skipping with a bypass ticket.

If the question said that the majority of park goers have bypass tickets, then we would be talking
_________________

If you find my post helpful, please GIVE ME SOME KUDOS!

Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Status: Pursuit of happyness
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 25
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Leadership
GMAT Date: 04-24-2013
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)
Premium Member
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2014, 01:57
Hi
When you can bypass the entrance with season passes as in C there would not be congestion even in the first place with few attendants. The Manager's claim is that the congestion is at the entrance and waiting is at the entrance. If there is waiting inside the park then your additional manpower in the entrance does not reduce the waiting time there.Hence answer is B

Regards
Siva
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 226
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2014, 07:17
MacFauz wrote:
A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the number of attendants at the park's entrance gates, claiming the new attendants will alleviate line congestion. The manager reasons that, since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park, and the increased revenue will offset the cost of the extra attendants.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the park manager's reasoning is flawed?

(A) People who leave the current long lines at the entrance already reduce wait times to some degree. Out Of Scope. We do not care about people who leave the lines. Our only concern is whether increasing attendants will increase traffic.

(B) The lines at attractions inside the park already make the average wait times inside considerably longer than those at the entrance. If this is true, it would mean that the people attending the theme park will still have to be waiting almost for the same amount of time as before. Only difference is that time that would have been spent waiting at the entrance previously will now be spent waiting at each attraction. So Answer.
(C) A majority of people who visit the park have season passes, allowing them to bypass the entrance. Out of scope. Our concern is only about the people waiting at the entrance.

(D) Many visitors opposing the plan have indicated that they prefer congestion at the entrance to potential overcrowding inside the park. Out of scope. Our concern is only about the waiting time and not congestion or overcrowding.

(E) Though the number of attendants will double under the manager's plan, the number of visitors might only increase by 25 percent. Wont necessarily weaken. The revenues from the tickets can be much greater than the salary for the attendees and hence even a small increase in revenue might easily set off the salaries paid.


I am not sure on why D is marked as wrong. Basically the waiting time which is reduced at entrance would get added inside the park because of more visitors and this would be undesirable to many visitors
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2013
Posts: 74
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
GPA: 3.62
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Apr 2015, 19:13
1
1
the answer to this is hidden in the part that says "many of the visitors opposing the plan"
Say there are 500000000000000000000000 visitors and only 10 of them oppose this plan. Out of these 9 say that they prefer longer lines outside that overcrowding inside and single person left does not like something else. This means that the sample taken may or may not be correct.

I think option D is not out of scope but has the above mentioned ambiguity that may not be 100% tight.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8386
Location: Pune, India
A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Apr 2015, 22:10
1
1
sayansarkar wrote:
the answer to this is hidden in the part that says "many of the visitors opposing the plan"
Say there are 500000000000000000000000 visitors and only 10 of them oppose this plan. Out of these 9 say that they prefer longer lines outside that overcrowding inside and single person left does not like something else. This means that the sample taken may or may not be correct.

I think option D is not out of scope but has the above mentioned ambiguity that may not be 100% tight.


Yes the decision has to be between (B) and (D) because they deal with the same issue. We will look in detail at why (D) is wrong.

Plan:
- Double the number of attendants to reduce congestion at entrance gate.
- So more people will visit the park, and the increased revenue will offset the cost of the extra attendants

The logic is that if the congestion is less, more people will visit.

What will show that the reasoning is flawed?

(B) The lines at attractions inside the park already make the average wait times inside considerably longer than those at the entrance.
This is much more congestion inside the park so it is unlikely that more people will turn up. A bit of reduced congestion at the entrance is unlikely to attract them if inside they have to deal with much more congestion in any case. Also, if some more people do turn up expecting less congestion at the gate, it will only increase congestion at the attractions and hence the number of people might reduce again. Hence, this points out the flaw in the plan.

(D) Many visitors opposing the plan have indicated that they prefer congestion at the entrance to potential overcrowding inside the park.
Here there are multiple red flags - what do they mean by "many visitors"? Most visitors would have been much more convincing
Also focus on "potentialovercrowding inside". It doesn't tell you whether the park is overcrowded or not. Say, if there is no overcrowding right now and even if the visitors increase by 50%, still there is no overcrowding, then the plan will succeed. This option talks about a hypothetical case and doesn't tell us what the reality is. Option (B) tells us that actually there is already overcrowding and more people will only make it worse. So option (D) is incorrect and option (B) is correct.

Answer (B)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Sep 2015
Posts: 55
Reviews Badge
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2017, 20:42
IMO this isn't a good question.

Theme parks are pretty big, people can't see lines inside when they are lining up at the entrance. On top of that, you ONLY pay at the entrance (obviously not including food inside). Therefore (B) is irrelevant. People will still come in and you got their money. :P

(C) on the other hand is a strong contender. If most people (majority) already have season passes, there is pretty much no crowding. This is a direct attack on the argument's premise. No crowd -> no need for alleviation and therefore, no need for extra attendants. Season pass = no extra revenue. Literally (C) destroys the argument.

This question hinges too much on one's perception of a theme park and IMO a bad question.
_________________

Insanity at its finest.

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 15 Oct 2017
Posts: 309
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2018, 07:45
Why not C?

If "majority" of visitors have passes that do not require them to stand in line at all then having more attendants at the entrance is not going to have an effect on revenue - visitors who have to come will anyway come so increasing the number of attendants does not help the cause and the reason for the causal argument as given by the manager (less waiting time at entrance=more revenue) is broken down!
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8386
Location: Pune, India
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2018, 22:47
1
urvashis09 wrote:
Why not C?

If "majority" of visitors have passes that do not require them to stand in line at all then having more attendants at the entrance is not going to have an effect on revenue - visitors who have to come will anyway come so increasing the number of attendants does not help the cause and the reason for the causal argument as given by the manager (less waiting time at entrance=more revenue) is broken down!


You are given in the argument "since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park"
Even if majority (say 60%) of people have passes, there is a thirty mins wait for those who buy tickets. How many have passes is immaterial to our argument. We are only talking about those 40% who are buying tickets at the counter and waiting for 30 mins in the line. We need to figure out why the reduction in time spent in buying the ticket may not lead to more people coming.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 15 Oct 2017
Posts: 309
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2018, 00:46
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
urvashis09 wrote:
Why not C?

If "majority" of visitors have passes that do not require them to stand in line at all then having more attendants at the entrance is not going to have an effect on revenue - visitors who have to come will anyway come so increasing the number of attendants does not help the cause and the reason for the causal argument as given by the manager (less waiting time at entrance=more revenue) is broken down!


You are given in the argument "since the wait times at the entrance will be reduced from about thirty minutes to ten minutes, more people will visit the park"
Even if majority (say 60%) of people have passes, there is a thirty mins wait for those who buy tickets. How many have passes is immaterial to our argument. We are only talking about those 40% who are buying tickets at the counter and waiting for 30 mins in the line. We need to figure out why the reduction in time spent in buying the ticket may not lead to more people coming.


Oh, I get it! I guess I was just focussing on the revenue part.. Thank you!
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the &nbs [#permalink] 20 Mar 2018, 00:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A manager at a local theme park has proposed doubling the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron
Copyright

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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.