A successful clothing department store, in a central downtown location

B can be wrong because the cost of procuring parking lot can be divided among other stores in the lot , not hurting that much in terms of cost.

Posted from my mobile device

IMO B

Store is moving to suburbs -> 1. Low cost of moving 2. Growing store and need more space
So, the answer should negate either.. that it won't grow or it will cost them more

B is the only answer pointing towards that

­Other stores is out of the context or if it is an assumption then it is too wide.

­

Magoosh Official Explanation:

The credited answer is (B).

The cost per square foot may be almost half as much in the suburbs, so it initially sounds cheaper, but the "sprawling parking lot" in the suburbs will be part of the lot, and hence will count in the cost. The word "sprawling" implies very big. It could easily be more than twice as big as the floor space of the store, so the overall cost of this suburban lot, even with the lower per-foot rate, would be much higher than it would be for a downtown lot. In that case, relocating to the suburbs would not save costs, so this fact by itself could possibly undermine the conclusion completely.

The building codes in the suburbs are different—does that mean it's more or less expensive to build something in the suburbs than downtown? We don't know. Furthermore, we don't know if the store plans to build, or will be renting a space in an already constructed building, in which case building costs associated with codes would be irrelevant. Choice (A) is incorrect.

At the heart of (C), we have a cost issue for consumers, not for the store. It doesn't directly affect the store's balance sheet. If the commute to the suburb dissuades a significant number of customers from coming, that could be a problem, but we have no clear evidence to conclude that this would happen. Choice (C) is incorrect because we would need to assume information that isn't in the passage or answer choice.

Choice (D) merely tells us about an overall pattern, and gives us no information about why this pattern is in place. Is there something relative adverse about suburban locations? Or, is it just the case that not many stores have even attempted such a move? We don't know, so we can't say that this undermines the plan. Choice (D) is incorrect.

Choice (E) tells about what would happen if the store moved to other downtown locations. This is not part of the plan under consideration, nor is it clear whether the difference cited would have any cost consequences for the store. This is 100% irrelevant. Choice (E) is incorrect.­