Advertisement: Our competitors' computer salespeople are paid accordin

Competitor salespeople paid as per revenue they bring so they try to sell more expensive units.
Computomart pays fixed amount so salespeople will not push the most expensive units.

Conclusion: When you buy a computer at Comput-o-Mart, you are not overpaying more than need (paying for computing capabilities you don't need)

We need to weaken this:

A. Some less-expensive computers actually have greater computing power than more expensive ones.

The conclusion is that you will not overpay (pay more than what you need). The point is not which units have more computing capabilities. The point is that as per need, are you being made to buy the more expensive units. Paying for capabilities you do not need is just another way of saying paying for more than the features etc that you need. Usually, the more expensive a product, more capabilities it will have. There could certainly be exceptions.

B. Salespeople who have a financial incentive to make sales generally provide more attentive service than do other salespeople.

Irrelevant. The argument is not discussing the quality of service. We are discussing whether the salesperson will push a more expensive unit if he/she has a financial incentive.

C. Extended warranties purchased for less-expensive computers can cost nearly as much as the purchase price of the computer.

Irrelevant

D. Comput-o-Mart is open only limited hours, which makes it more difficult for many shoppers to buy computers there than at other retail stores.

Ease of buying is irrelevant.

E. Comput-o-Mart does not sell any computers that support only basic computing.

Correct. Here is a problem. Comput-o-Mart has no basic units at all. All their products are expensive so whatever the salesperson recommends, it will be expensive whether you need it or not. So weakens our conclusion.

Answer (E)
_________________

Advertisement: Our competitors’ computer salespeople are paid according to the value of the products they sell, so they have a financial incentive to convince you to buy the most expensive units—whether you need them or not. - A company’s advertisement seems to be informing potential customers of an incentive structure followed by its competitors. Its competitors’ salespeople, according to the company, have a financial incentive to convince potential customers to buy the most expensive units irrespective of their needs.

But here at Comput-o-Mart, our salespeople are paid a salary that is not dependent on the value of their sales, so they won’t try to tell you what to buy. - The advertisement goes on to inform that their salespeople’s salary is independent of the value of sales. (This seems to be mentioned to demonstrate the difference in the incentive structure)

That means when you buy a computer at Comput-o-Mart, you can be sure you’re not paying for computing capabilities you don’t need. - The advertisement concludes that their potential customers can rest assured that they are not being sold higher-end units if they don’t need such capabilities.

Gist:The advertisement informs its readers that the company’s competitors salespeople have an incentive to push the most expensive units – irrespective of customer needs while the financial structure in this company is such that its salespeople have no such incentive(support), Thus, the customers will surely not be paying for capabilities they don’t need when they buy from this company(conclusion).


The argument makes two assumptions:

• The only situation salespeople up-sell in is when their salary is dependent on the value of sales.
• If salespeople do not up-sell, there is no other reason that will push customers to buy computers beyond their computing needs.

We need to weaken the advertisement’s reasoning. Anything that attacks either of the two assumptions above will work. So, either of the two:

• an answer choice that proves that salespeople still have a vested incentive to up-sell
• or an answer choice that shows another reason why customers might still be pushed to buy higher-end units

Of course, weakeners could also be built around other assumptions in the argument.



A. Some less-expensive computers actually have greater computing power than more expensive ones.
Incorrect. Computer power is one capability, albeit an important one, while there would be many other factors as well. So, even if some less-expensive computers fare better on one factor, we do not see any relation with salespeople pushing (or not pushing) higher-end units.

Further, let’s even assume that computer power is the single most important need of customers. Typically a more expensive unit will have better capabilities. This answer choice tells us that there are some exceptions. The conclusion highlights that ‘the customers will not be paying for capabilities they don’t need’. So anyway customers would not have paid more to get additional computing power.

On top of these points, we do not know whether the company even carries any of these computers.

B. Salespeople who have a financial incentive to make sales generally provide more attentive service than do other salespeople.
Incorrect. The advertisement never says that the company’s salespeople do not have a financial incentive to make sales. All it says is that the salary does not depend on the ‘value’ of sales. The salary could, for example, depend on the number of units sold.

Let us, to clarify further, take this option to mean that the company’s salespeople do not have a financial incentive to make sales. The argument is that the salespeople do not push units beyond the customer’s needs. How their quality of service fares is immaterial.

C. Extended warranties purchased for less-expensive computers can cost nearly as much as the purchase price of the computer.
Incorrect. Ok. Good to know. So warranties can be expensive. How does this matter? No bearing on the given argument.

D. Comput-o-Mart is open only limited hours, which makes it more difficult for many shoppers to buy computers there than at other retail stores.
Incorrect. So many shoppers find it more difficult to shop with the company. This has no bearing on the argument at all.

E. Comput-o-Mart does not sell any computers that support only basic computing.
Correct. Aaha! So, the company does not even sell computers that support basic computing in the first place. So, the customers who are looking for such units will end up paying for capabilities they don’t need at this company.


SC Notes:

1. That can be skipped when it appears as an object or a connector

• products they sell (“that” is skipped between ‘products’ and ‘they’; acts as an object)
• sure you’re not paying (skipped between ‘sure’ and ‘you’; acts as a connector)
• capabilities you don’t need (skipped between ‘capabilities’ and ‘you’; acts as an object)

2. The second sentence starts with a “but”.
3. “That” is the subject of the third sentence and refers to the entire idea in the previous sentence.
4. In option B, ‘do’ in “than do other salespeople” can be skipped
5. In option D, ‘which’ refers to the entire preceding clause.

If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask.

Advertisement: Our competitors' computer salespeople are paid according to the value of the products they sell, so they have a financial incentive to convince you to buy the most expensive units—whether you need them or not. But here at Comput-o-Mart, our salespeople are paid a salary that is not dependent on the value of their sales, so they won't try to tell you what to buy. That means when you buy a computer at Comput-o-Mart, you can be sure you're not paying for computing capabilities you don't need.

Conclusion - At Comput-o-mart, you are paying for computing capabilities you need.

Which of the following would, if true, most weaken the advertisement's reasoning?

A. Some less-expensive computers actually have greater computing power than more expensive ones. - This can be true but it doesnt affect our conclusion.
B. Salespeople who have a financial incentive to make sales generally provide more attentive service than do other salespeople. - Same, maybe salespeople are more attentive but this doesnt mean they advise you correctly.
C. Extended warranties purchased for less-expensive computers can cost nearly as much as the purchase price of the computer. - This can be the case with some computer but doesnt affect how does comput-o - mart come here.
D. Comput-o-Mart is open only limited hours, which makes it more difficult for many shoppers to buy computers there than at other retail stores. - This doesnt put any dent on the conclusion. they are giving your buck's worth in the time they are selling to you.
E. Comput-o-Mart does not sell any computers that support only basic computing. - Now, this is interesting because as per the conclusion you only pay for the computing capabilities you have. But if a person with basic computing skills come to the store, he would still have to purchase something which is not as per his capabilities.

Ans - E

Official Explanation

Argument Evaluation

This question asks us to weaken the argument's reasoning. The advertisement makes the following argument: because the salespeople at Comput-o-Mart are on salary rather than paid a commission for products they sell, the store's customers will not pay for computers that are more powerful than those that the customers need.

To weaken this reasoning, we need to drive a wedge between the given premises and the conclusion: we need to show that it is not necessarily true that, simply because salespeople do not have an incentive to sell more powerful computers, customers will not buy computers that exceed their own needs.

For example, consider a case where customers' computing needs are basic, but Comput-o-Mart sells only advanced computers. In this scenario, customers purchasing from Comput-o-Mart would almost certainly be paying for computing capabilities that they do not need.

A. The argument hinges on the fact that a customer may pay for computing power that he or she does not need. This statement simply notes that high computing power may in at least some cases not cost more than low computing power. In this case, if anything, it might be more likely that a customer would buy a computer more powerful than he or she needs. Even so, the statement is a general statement about computers rather than a statement specifically about those sold at Comput-o-Mart. We are not told whether Comput-o-Mart even sells any of these computers. If not, then this statement is irrelevant to the argument.

A. This statement suggests that the salespeople at Comput-o-Mart may be less attentive to customers than salespeople at Comput-o-Mart's competitors. That clearly does not give us a reason to think that a customer at Comput-o-Mart may end up paying for computing power that he or she does not need.

C. The argument discusses whether customers at Comput-o-Mart pay for computing power that they do not need. The costs of extended warranties are irrelevant to this discussion.

D. Again, this is irrelevant to the argument: Comput-o-Mart's hours, however limited, do not affect whether its customers pay for computing power that they do not need.

E. Correct. If Comput-o-Mart's customers require only basic computing and Comput-o-Mart sells only advanced computers, then it follows that Comput-o-Mart's customers are likely to pay for computing power that they do not need. That is, regardless of Comput-o-Mart's salespeople's payment structure (salary versus commission), if Comput-o-Mart sells only more advanced, more expensive models, then any customer at Comput-o-Mart who requires only basic computing would in fact be paying for unnecessary computing power.

The correct answer is E.

Hello KarishmaB
My problem with E is that Comput-o-Mart not having basic units does not mean that all their products are expensive !!

The argument itself mentions "you can be sure you're not paying for computing capabilities you don't need"
One would need to pay more for advanced computing capabilities. Comput-o-Mart claims that salespeople will guide properly and customers can buy only what they need but if Comput-o-Mart doesn't stock basic products, salepeople will always end up guiding the advanced products even if the customer doesn't need it. All their products will be advanced and hence will charge for advanced computing capabilities.
Hence (E) weakens their reasoning.
Note that CR does assume that one is comfortable with everyday reasoning, things that make sense.
_________________

Conclusion:
You can be SURE you're not paying for unneeded capabilities.

Premise:
Comput-o-Mart pays salary.
Others pay commission, which may encourage upselling.

A. Some less-expensive computers actually have greater computing power than more expensive ones.
I guess I COULD still buy a computer at CoM that has unneeded capabilities, but it doesn't exactly weaken the argument. Fine if you want to keep it and look for something better, but I'd axe it. Eliminate.
B. Salespeople who have a financial incentive to make sales generally provide more attentive service than do other salespeople.
I guess I COULD still buy a computer at CoM that has unneeded capabilities, but it doesn't exactly weaken the argument. Fine if you want to keep it and look for something better, but I'd axe it. Eliminate.
C. Extended warranties purchased for less-expensive computers can cost nearly as much as the purchase price of the computer.
Has no impact on whether I buy a computer with unneeded capabilities. Eliminate.
D. Comput-o-Mart is open only limited hours, which makes it more difficult for many shoppers to buy computers there than at other retail stores.
Has no impact on whether I buy a computer with unneeded capabilities. Eliminate.
E. Comput-o-Mart does not sell any computers that support only basic computing.
If all I need is a basic computer, the only thing I can get at CoM is something with unneeded capabilities. That directly violates the conclusion.

Hi Expert,

I'm not clear at all about choice E.

Premise: the passage says that Comput-o-Mart, our salespeople are paid a salary that is not dependent on the value of their sales, so they won't try to tell you what to buy.

This clearly means that they won't try to convince you but it is your choice.

Conclusion: That means when you buy a computer at Comput-o-Mart, you can be sure you're not paying for computing capabilities you don't need.

Option E. Comput-o-Mart does not sell any computers that support only basic computing.

Why Will I probably buy a computer beyond my needs if I'm not persuaded to buy anything?
- We need to assume that a person is completely uninformed about PCs
- We need to assume that a person will decide to pay more than otherwise will in other stores (since we can clearly infer that a price go up as the pc capabilities go up)

Since operators at Computer-o-Mart won't try to tell me what to buy, I can simply decide to not buy anything.

Regards.

"That means when you buy a computer at Comput-o-Mart, you can be sure you're not paying for computing capabilities you don't need."

The argument is asking about when you buy, not when you don't.

The question you raise is a great type of thing to think about...it's just that the argument removes that outcome from the range of possibilities.

KarishmaB The original conclusion says "when you buy a computer from computer-o-mart, then you can be sure that you don't pay more than you need to".

I eliminated E with this line of reasoning - if computer-o-mart anyway does not stock basic computing units, the customers looking for basic computing units will simply not buy from computer-o-mart. In which case, the reasoning still stands.

Although I understand why E is the best option out of the 5 available options, I could eliminate E while I scanned the options the first time. Could you shed some light please.

In that case, you are assuming that people understand their needs and will choose the store accordingly. If they understand their needs then the salespeople have no role to play in any store and the entire argument falls apart. The point is that normally the customers don't understand their needs and salespeople fool them by selling expensive products with capabilities they don't need. The argument claims that since Comput-o-Mart's salespeople are not incentivised, they won't sell unnecessary capabilities.
But what if Comput-o-Mart has only high end products? The salespeople will sell what they have and all they have are high end products. So one could still end up paying for unnecessary capabilities if they buy from Comput-o-Mart. That is how we weaken the argument with option (E).
_________________

KarishmaB Understood. Thanks for the quick response!