It is currently 23 Sep 2017, 16:47

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 185 [18], given: 0

At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2006, 22:16
18
KUDOS
90
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

24% (01:29) correct 76% (02:11) wrong based on 4669 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

(A) some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available.
(B) the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals.
(C) a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering
(D) a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer
(E) with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 185 [18], given: 0

Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 744

Kudos [?]: 196 [1], given: 0

Location: Dallas, Texas

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2006, 23:16
1
KUDOS
Whatelse can it be except E ? If you raise the height by same amount for all people, the sit at the same level and none has any height advantage or better view.
_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

Kudos [?]: 196 [1], given: 0

Director
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 702

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2006, 23:35
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
Whatelse can it be except E ? If you raise the height by same amount for all people, the sit at the same level and none has any height advantage or better view.

I also answered E with the same reasoning but E is not the answer. I felt this one is tough too.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 744

Kudos [?]: 196 [6], given: 0

Location: Dallas, Texas

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2006, 23:45
6
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
I see it now ... it's about profit and generalization says shorter table= more time spent on meal = more profit
High stool = less time spent = less costy quick meal = less profit

Should be C.
_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

Kudos [?]: 196 [6], given: 0

Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 917

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 07:16
1
KUDOS
I went for D also. The conclusion of the argument: "Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.
" indicates this is about profits not really about whether customers can see celebs

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2006
Posts: 60

Kudos [?]: 4 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 07:20
1
KUDOS
I think it is E

Kudos [?]: 4 [1], given: 0

Director
Affiliations: FRM Charter holder
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 727

Kudos [?]: 94 [4], given: 4

Schools: Stanford, Chicago Booth, Babson College
Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 07:35
4
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

A. some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available.

B. the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals.

C. a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering

An exception. So there wont be increase in profits. So the answer is C.

D. a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer

This is actually stregthening the logic followed in the argument. So D can't be the answer.

E. with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables

Argument does not say that all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating are going to be accomodated. So E can't be the answer.

Kudos [?]: 94 [4], given: 4

Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 917

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 09:11
1
KUDOS
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
I see it now ... it's about profit and generalization says shorter table= more time spent on meal = more profit
High stool = less time spent = less costy quick meal = less profit

Should be C.

Aren't you making an assumption about the price of the meal of a person standing vs. sitting? nothing in this statement C suggests that because high stool people spend less time, they also spend less money.

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 241

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 09:56
I am really lost on this one. Other than A and B, all the other 3 choices look probable to me.
I hope a question like this would appear in GMAT only after you have started scoring in the 760 range.

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 495

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 12:00
one more for D

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 69

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 14:14
tennis_ball wrote:
At present the Hollywood Restaurant has only standard-height tables. However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities. Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as long as diners seated at standard-height tables. Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

A. some celebrities come to the Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they were available.

B. the price of meals ordered by celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any, they spend lingering over their meals.

C. a customer of the Hollywood who would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization about lingering

D. a restaurant's customers who spend less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who remain at their meals longer

E. with enough tall tables to accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there would be no view except of other tall tables.

D
_________________

------------------------------------------------------
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams"

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 243

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Location: Albuquerque, NM

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2006, 22:54
Clear D, find a situation which causes profits to decrease: only if the pain of sitting on these butt paining stools will cause the patrons to order less and get the hell out of there

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 185 [4], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Dec 2006, 01:30
4
KUDOS
sorry to disappoint most of you guys:

aurobindo is right. OA is C.

But if you can see this type of question in GMAT, you are probably closing in on 49 in verbal.

no OE, so deduce your own explanation.

Kudos [?]: 185 [4], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 107

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 5

Location: United States
Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2009, 09:58
If C is correct, how come the stimulus itself doesn't even mention the "lingering" generalization? "Lingering" first appears in choice B. Are we sure this GMAT question is even legitimate/reflective of the real exam?!?

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 5

Manager
Joined: 02 Oct 2008
Posts: 58

Kudos [?]: 70 [0], given: 0

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2009, 12:21
I go with answer E. It seems more appropriate

Kudos [?]: 70 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 216

Kudos [?]: 94 [42], given: 6

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2009, 18:11
42
KUDOS
12
This post was
BOOKMARKED
At first I was btw choosing D and E. But after reading the explanations, I see why C is the best.

D. States that people who sit there for a shorter amount of time have a cheaper tab than people who sit for longer. This doesn't necessarily undermine the restaurant owner's conclusion, because the higher turnover can still result in a larger total revenue. For example, if people who stay for an avg of 30mins order \$10 of food per person and people who stay for 1hr order 15 dollars of food, then in 1hr the total revenue in the first scenario would be 20 and in the second only 15. And the argument assumes that there will be higher turnover after all the tables are converted to tall tables.

E. States that if all the tables were tall tables then the view would be ruined. The question states that taller tables offer a better view of the celebrities. It does NOT say that the taller table offers a better view of the celebrities because the celebrities are sitting at lower tables or because the tall tables are spaced far enough apart to get a good view of the celebrities. Therefore, answer E doesn't undermine the restaurant owner's conclusion. Someone pointed out that the increase in tall tables would take away the height advantage. This is an assumption on the part of the reader! The question merely states that tall tables afford a better view of celebrities, period. It doesn't say how it offers a better view of the celebrities.

C is the best because the owner plans to increase revenues by drawing people in with universally good views of celebs from the tall tables, which also discourage lingering. Basically he will attract more people who will spend less time eating. However, if they do linger then his profits won't be higher than before when he had the standard height tables, which typically made people stay longer than the tall tables. He won't be able to achieve the higher turnover rate he was looking for.

That's my 2cents. Keep in mind this question asks for the best answer, which in this case is C.

Kudos [?]: 94 [42], given: 6

Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Posts: 206

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 8

Schools: HEC Paris, , Tepper
Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2009, 23:56
Hi!

Nice explanation, and nice question! My initial choice was also D.

I find the last explanation very appealing, but am still confused about the following: why the author has the right to assume that people who do celebrity-watching do also linger? This point is not explicitly stated in the argument (if it was, this question would have been much easier.) And for me, it is not within "common sense knowledge" to assume that "celebrity-watchers" also tend to linger at the restaurant.

Any comment?
_________________

If you like my post, a kudos is not expected but appreciated

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 76

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 20

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Dec 2009, 05:37
Agree with 11MBA. Good reasoning.
C for me.

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 20

Intern
Joined: 07 Oct 2009
Posts: 32

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Dec 2009, 10:45
Hi 11MBA,

Im sorry still i don't understand the meaning of 'C' and how it's right?

Do you mean by lingering less, people will eat less and hence more profit.What is generalization about lingering?

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 165

Kudos [?]: 198 [1], given: 3

Location: Streamwood IL
Schools: Kellogg(Evening),Booth (Evening)
WE 1: 5 Years
Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Dec 2009, 18:55
1
KUDOS
Tough one for sure E looked perfect.
_________________

Rock On

Kudos [?]: 198 [1], given: 3

Re: Tough CR: Hollywood Restaurant from GMATPrep   [#permalink] 20 Dec 2009, 18:55

Go to page    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 90 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by