Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 10:11

### 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

# Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 126
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 85 [3] , given: 0

Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 May 2005, 01:59
3
KUDOS
19
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.

A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.

Source: Arco or 1000 Series
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 87
Followers: 2

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

Re: CR-Excerpt from a letter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2008, 22:57
I am reluctant to choose A since there is nothing to inferr and i don't think there is problem with A wrt word "All" since sentense clearly says "All those who have demanded resignation.." so it boils down to only some people,not all employees.

Morever passage clearly states that "growth will show" so chairman is clearly referring to future results but according to D says "The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years".So there is a confusion which 6 six years are referred to.

Given all this i will try my luck with A.
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1381
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 328 [0], given: 0

Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2008, 19:27
1. Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1409
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 388 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

05 Jul 2008, 19:08
spriya

For that matter E also looks good. Stimulus says Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever.

Not guilty and acquittal are cause/effect in the sense that only people who are not guilty are acquitted. People who are guilty will be convicted. How ever, the word Any pulled me back as its a inference Q. But reading the stimulus again, it says no court of law has found him guilty. Thats when I felt E is probably a keeper. How different are legal proceedings from criminal offenses might be the killer here on E?

A to me is merely a restatement, Some one might say so with E as well

D how ever translates unbroken six-year record of growth into steady growth for the past six years.

I find this Q very atypical of GMAT inference Q's where is this Q from?

Thanks
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

05 Jul 2008, 23:09

Here is why A is incorrect:
A states that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes. In formal logic this means (If Demand Resignation then Motivated by personal Desires)
However, in the stimulus it says, "Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation." In formal logic this means (If Motivated by personal Desires then Demand Resignation).
In simpler terms choice A says, A then B however, we only know B then A to be true from the simulus.
Therefore, choice A is an incorrect reversal of the sufficient and necessary terms.

icandy, E is incorrect because we don't know the results of ANY legal preceedings against the chairman. For all we know they are still in progress, hence he hasn't been found guilty yet.
Director
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 536
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 161 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2008, 06:23
spriya wrote:
Merely restating whats given in the argument does not mean it is inference .So (A) is out.Now i could get the logic. In (E) its just how can v relate criminal offences with legal pioceedings.So this out .
(D) seems to be the best solution

Actually it does. On an inference question we are looking for the answer that MUST be true. But in this case (A) does not restate what is given in the argument. The argument says that the the individuals seeking to control the corporation have called for his resignation. (A) says that ALL those who are demanding his resignation seek to control the corporation. (A) is not a restating of the argument.

ex.

The people who want to control the corporation are calling for his resignation.

All people calling for his resignation want to control the corporation.

The second one is not restating the first.

But I agree that D is the answer.

Unbroken 6 year growth = Expanding steadily.
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 450
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 222 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2008, 00:41
Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
SVP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1520
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 822 [0], given: 1

Re: Letter from the chairman [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2008, 09:50
Tarek,

the passage says "in the American tradition", which is then not referenced in the C alternative. The passage states the opinion of the chairman, but the question to "properly infer" makes no mention of "according to the chairman".

On the other end, there is no way in which one could argue about the company's growth record, is there?

I still think that the answer is C. So, since one could not argue about the company's growth record as you said, what do you think is the guy trying to say here? The "in the American tradition" shouldn't be referenced directly because this is an inference question. What do you honestly think is the guy trying to say indirectly? he's trying to say that he's innocent.
SVP
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 1520
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 822 [0], given: 1

Re: Letter from the chairman [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2008, 17:05
tarek99 wrote:
Tarek,

I am not 100% sure that ans is D and surely respect your opinion. However, the question here is "what can be properly inferred", not what the guy's main point is (which for me, is that he is not gonna resign now since he's not been proven guilty now).

Let us wait for the OA.

I was considering that I could be wrong, not you. We are meant to read words in a different light .
My answer choice was never D, but rather C.

oh, ok. hehe....well, let me provide my reasoning to each answer choice:

A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.

First of all, an inference is something not explicitly stated, but this answer choice is directly mentioned in the passage, so eliminate.

(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.

Any misdeeds? The argument discussed about only 1 particular case, so the usage of "any" is extreme

(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.

That's what he's trying to say indirectly, so CORRECT!

(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.

This is mentioned directly in the passage, so this can't be an inference

(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.

NEVER speculate when making an inference. There is nothing mentioned in the passage that suggests the outcome of any legal action against him.

Therefore, C should be the answer
Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 66
Followers: 1

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

A number of charges have been raised against me, some [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Feb 2009, 11:09
Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.

A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 109
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 193 [7] , given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Feb 2009, 12:10
7
KUDOS
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

-----------------------
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes. ---> The passage states that those who wanted to control the corporation for their own use demanded his resignation. This does NOT mean that they were the only ones who demanded his resignation; there may be many other people (with different motives) who would have demanded his resignation.

The statement is actually reversed.

Excerpt states that X --> Y
Option A states that Y --> X, which may not be true.

(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation. ---> We cannot say that his misdeeds were motivated for the wellness of the corporation. Moreover, in the first place, we don't know whether he's guilty. To add to it, 'Any' is an extreme word.

(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense. ---> We cannot conclude this. Acquittal from a court of law does not mean that the person is innocent. Acquittal may have happened due to lack of sufficient evidence against him. The word '...any criminal offence' is again moving to an extreme.

(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years. ---> This statement can be safely inferred from '...corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth...'.

(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal. ---> I feel that the trap here is legal vs. criminal proceedings. IMO, criminal is a subset of legal. That's the only reason I've discarded it otherwise, I found it close.
-----------------------

My choice is option D.

HTH.
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 104
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

16 Feb 2009, 22:44
In attempting I am getting the INFERENCE Q wrong.

It is because my fundamentals are , there is a difference between "must-be-true" and "inferred" questions.

For a must-be-true Q we can restate a premise or conclude on 2-3 premises etc.
But for inference Q , it has to be an external factor which is not directly stated in the premises.

It works for me in many cases but doesn't work in some cases.

For example here .....
Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, ......

Why I get confused is that actually we are restating the a given fact premise, so how is it Inference ?

If any one has some idea .... pl help. I don't want to know why OA id D. I want guidance in fundamentals here.
Intern
Joined: 16 Feb 2009
Posts: 3
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2009, 05:55
chalven wrote:
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

Conclusion of the stem is that chairman is innocent until proven otherwise and that the Corporation has shown growth during the tenure of the current chairman
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
There might be some individuals who might have demanded the current chairman's resignation and these guys might not have been motivated enough to press charges against him.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
The stem does not directly imply this.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
Stem says that chairman is not guilty until proven otherwise, hence this is not implied.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
Stem says it has. Correct answer
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
Stem does not directly refer to something like this, it just says that the chairman is innocent until proven otherwise.

In case my answer is incorrect, please let me know where is went wrong.

Thanks
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 109
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 193 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2009, 07:07
Hi idiotdumbguy,

I find all your reasoning adequate except the first one. For option 1, you've stated the following:
---------------------------------------------
There might be some individuals who might have demanded the current chairman's resignation and these guys might not have been motivated enough to press charges against him.
---------------------------------------------

whereas option 1 states something different:
---------------------------------------------
The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
---------------------------------------------

It’s nowhere focusing on how much motivated where those people who demanded his resignation. Focus is on the cause of motivation and NOT the degree of motivation.

You only have to explain that among those who demanded the resignation, there could be few who had reasons other than the desire to control the corporation. In other words, those few people were motivated by some other desire. For ex., those few people desired to improve transparency in the organization, which the current chairman was not interested in, and hence, the demand for his resignation.

Does it make sense now?

Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 117
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 109 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2009, 09:52
1
KUDOS
For gmatavenue, at his/her request:

There is in fact NO difference between "inference" and "must be true" on the GMAT (nor on the LSAT, for that matter). The correct answer to an straight Inference question is an answer which MUST be true if the information in the paragraph is true. Even if the wording of the question says "would most likely agree with" or "can be inferred", you must interpret this as "must be true if the statements above are true".

gmatavenue wrote:

"For a must-be-true Q we can restate a premise or conclude on 2-3 premises etc.
But for inference Q , it has to be an external factor which is not directly stated in the premises."

In fact, for any Inference question (whether the exact wording is "must be true" or not), we must find a conclusion which logically follows from 2 or 3 premises. In a few cases, the correct answer is actually a necessary assumption. The "must be true" rule still works for these cases, because if the other evidence in the stimulus is true, and the conclusion in the stimulus is true, then any NECESSARY assumption has to be true as well.

The correct answer must NEVER depend on an external factor which is not stated in the stimulus.

I agree with those who say that this is a badly constructed question. The correct answer appears to be (D), because none of the others logically follow from the paragraph (stimulus). That is, none of them must be true if the paragraph is true. The problem with (D) is that it is actually STATED in the paragraph, rather than being something that we can logically PROVE or DEDUCE from the paragraph. In a proper Inference question, the correct answer is DEDUCED from the information in the paragraph.

I strongly suspect that this is NOT a real GMAT question from the GMAC.
_________________

Grumpy

Kaplan Canada LSAT/GMAT/GRE teacher and tutor

Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 117
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2009, 23:08
gmatavenue advised me privately that this is an Arco question, not real GMAC.

SORRY -- CORRECTION -- I am thinking of a different question. I have NOT been told what the source of this one was. Sorry, gmatavenue
_________________

Grumpy

Kaplan Canada LSAT/GMAT/GRE teacher and tutor

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1265
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 447 [0], given: 0

Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2009, 00:03
Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders:

A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?

(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 900
Followers: 72

Kudos [?]: 622 [0], given: 17

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2009, 09:47
"Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show"
other options dont make sense
source is 1000CR doc(not LSAT ones)
_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 320
Location: Washington DC
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 4

### Show Tags

13 May 2009, 19:18
I have confusion over the right answer, so posting here to brainstorm. Kindly post your answers with explanations.

Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.
Manager
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 206
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 4

Re: CR from 100 CR. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2009, 20:22
I have confusion over the right answer, so posting here to brainstorm. Kindly post your answers with explanations.

Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the chairman of a corporation to the stockholders.
A number of charges have been raised against me, some serious, some trivial. Individuals seeking to control the corporation for their own purposes have demanded my resignation. Remember that no court of law in any state has found me guilty of any criminal offense whatsoever. In the American tradition, as you know, an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, as the corporation’s unbroken six-year record of growth will show, my conduct of my official duties as chairman has only helped enhance the success of the corporation, and so benefited every stockholder.
Which of the following can be properly inferred from the excerpt?
(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.
(B) Any misdeeds that the chairman may have committed were motivated by his desire to enhance the success of the corporation.
(C) The chairman is innocent of any criminal offense.
(D) The corporation has expanded steadily over the past six years.
(E) Any legal proceedings against the chairman have resulted in his acquittal.

Oo toughie....
A seemed right, D s.r, E s.r too.

I'll go with A.

Growth need not mean expansion and there is no clear statement that legal proceedings were undertaken.
_________________

-talent is the desire to practice-

Manager
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 206
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 4

Re: CR from 100 CR. [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2009, 21:54
it has to be E then.

"all those" does not refer to everyone just those who have and there is a suggestion in stimuli that there are thos that have asked for his resignation.

WAIT! I realise what's wrong with A. Darn it...

(A) The chairman believes that all those who have demanded his resignation are motivated by desire to control the corporation for their own purposes.

The relationship in stimuli is all those who want to control the corporation have asked for his resignation.

(A) is the other way round....

darn it...should have had that...good one....
_________________

-talent is the desire to practice-

Re: CR from 100 CR.   [#permalink] 13 May 2009, 21:54

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8    Next  [ 150 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
10 Since the city council sent a letter to the residents of 9 09 Sep 2016, 14:20
Shipping Clerk: The five specially ordered shipments sent 0 25 Jul 2014, 07:04
28 Shipping Clerk: The five specially ordered shipments sent 14 01 Mar 2017, 03:00
Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the 0 04 Jan 2012, 22:45
3 Shipping Clerk: The five specially ordered shipments sent 9 18 Jun 2014, 05:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Below is an excerpt from a letter that was sent by the

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO 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®.