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

 It is currently 13 Dec 2018, 15:26

### 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 December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### GMATbuster's Weekly GMAT Quant Quiz, Tomorrow, Saturday at 9 AM PST

December 14, 2018

December 14, 2018

09:00 AM PST

10:00 AM PST

10 Questions will be posted on the forum and we will post a reply in this Topic with a link to each question. There are prizes for the winners.
• ### The winning strategy for 700+ on the GMAT

December 13, 2018

December 13, 2018

08:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

What people who reach the high 700's do differently? We're going to share insights, tips and strategies from data we collected on over 50,000 students who used examPAL.

# Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 362
Location: Texas
Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 11 Dec 2017, 07:40
1
5
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

66% (01:47) correct 34% (01:57) wrong based on 778 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant time and money to dismantle older houses piece by piece in order to reuse the wood. Although the company does earn a net profit despite these expenditures, the company could earn even more by adopting a new policy. Brothers’ new land contains hundreds of trees that are already slated to be razed; the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Brothers’ policy to reuse wood?

1) It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood.
2) There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.
3) Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.
4) It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.
5) The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily.

Originally posted by agdimple333 on 26 Jul 2011, 19:34.
Last edited by Skywalker18 on 11 Dec 2017, 07:40, edited 1 time in total.
formatted
Manager
Status: D-Day is on February 10th. and I am not stressed
Affiliations: American Management association, American Association of financial accountants
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 179
Location: Kuwait
Schools: Columbia university
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Nov 2011, 11:41
2
10
Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant time and money to dismantle older houses piece by piece in order to reuse the wood. Although the company does earn a net profit despite these expenditures, the company could earn even more by adopting a new policy. Brothers’ new land contains hundreds of trees that are already slated to be razed; the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Brothers’ policy to reuse wood?

a)It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood.

b)There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.

c)Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.

d)It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.

e)The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily.
_________________

Sky is the limit

##### General Discussion
SVP
Joined: 24 Jul 2011
Posts: 1520
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V48
GRE 1: Q800 V740
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 20:40
The correct option is (C) (or choice number 3 as expressed in the question).

1) There is no evidence that Brothers Inc will chop down all the trees, and even if it does this cannot be directly related to the profit they are earning.
2) Even if the wood is of the same quality as old wood from dismantled houses, it presents no evidence that Brothers Inc can use the old wood to earn more profit.
3) This is the correct answer - if sawmills are more cost effective at reshaping old wood, it makes sense to continue with the existing policy because using the trees would add costs.
4) This actually weakens the argument of Brothers Inc to keep using old wood
5) There is no relation to the number of old houses available and the profit that can be earned using the old wood.
_________________

GyanOne | Top MBA Rankings and MBA Admissions Blog

Premium MBA Essay Review|Best MBA Interview Preparation|Exclusive GMAT coaching

Get a FREE Detailed MBA Profile Evaluation | Call us now +91 98998 31738

Senior Manager
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 492
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 21:35
+1 for C.

Brother Inc's policy : Resuse wood > Newly chopped wood.

C strengthens this by suggesting why reused wood should be preferred.

Crick
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 309
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 620 Q39 V35
GMAT 2: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q50 V40
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 21:38
+1 for C

C weakens the argument that new trees are more profitable and hence strengthens Brother Inc's policy to reuse wood from old houses.
_________________

My GMAT Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/third-time-s-a-charm-142800.html#p1145912
Quant Concept Videos : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/2012/07/gmat-quant-videos.html
My GMAT Blog : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/

Retired Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 613
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Nov 2011, 23:45
I got D and realize it is wrong answer because I read wrongly the questions. The correct one in my second thought is C.
Quote:
a)It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood. =< out of scope.

b)There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees. => we need talk about cost and profit here. Not quality. Out of scope.

c)Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees. => Approve the police of reuse wood from dismantled houses.

d)It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood. => Approve the policy of use wood from the trees.

e)The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily. => partly strengthen, but lack of comparisons with the policy of using new wood. So, not affect too much.

_________________
Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 197
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2011, 21:59
Nice question. C and E are confusing. But I think E does not provide strong support to the argument. As already discussed above, E provides just partial support. C is very convincing and is the correct answer.
_________________

Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it

Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 70
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
Schools: ISB '18
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2015, 04:54
a)It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood.
>>>>>> This doesnt tell us anything about why reuse woods is effective .

b)There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.
>>>>>>>>>> talks about quality but not cost efficiency .

c)Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.
>>>> option c tells us why reuse wood is better than whole trees cost wise.

d)It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.

>>>> this is a weakner for the argu.

e)The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily.
>> this option tells us that the number of houses are growing but whether the plan to use reuse wood is effective or not is not described .

SO iMHO C
_________________

KUDOS pls if you like My Post

Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2009
Posts: 92
GMAT Date: 12-03-2014
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2015, 05:38
1
Ans : C
What is the conclusion : the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses
Pre-thinking : We need to bring in some information which Supports brother's inc Policy of using old wood. This can be done in many ways..
1) information which tells us that the new wood is not suitable for the company
2) Since the premise talks about cost saving, what if processing the new wood is more expensive or more labor intensive

Now lets look at the options :
a)It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood, :Not in Scope. the whole argument is based on which wood needs to be used

b)There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.:Probably does the opposite of what we want. If there is no difference , the conclusion can be an option for the company

c)Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.:This is inline with our pre-thinking. Lets keep this option

d)It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.: Does the opposite of what we want to achieve.we need an option which favours using old wood rather than fresh wood from trees. Hence not the answer

e)The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily. This one really doesn't do much to the argument as the whole argument is based on Cost saving and quality. Even though I was tempted by this option but it does not tell us anything about the trees. What if the number of trees are also increasing ?
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2620
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2015, 10:11
A - supports the new policy rather than the old one.
B - again, if the quality is the same, why not use something that you already have with no extra costs?
C - this one is against the new policy. So reuse is better - looking good
D - this one supports new policy, so out.
E - this is irrelevant.

so far, C is the best.
Moderator
Joined: 21 Jun 2014
Posts: 1094
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 540 Q45 V20
GPA: 2.49
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Mar 2016, 10:52
manalq8 wrote:
Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant time and money to dismantle older houses piece by piece in order to reuse the wood. Although the company does earn a net profit despite these expenditures, the company could earn even more by adopting a new policy. Brothers’ new land contains hundreds of trees that are already slated to be razed; the company should use those trees for wood instead of the old houses

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Brothers’ policy to reuse wood?

a)It is a waste of resources for a company that needs wood to chop down hundreds of trees but not use the wood.

b)There is virtually no difference in quality between wood reclaimed from older houses and wood processed from newly-chopped trees.

c)Sawmills can reshape previously used wood much more quickly and cost-effectively than it can shape whole trees.

d)It would cost the company less to use the trees it already owns than to pay to dismantle homes for previously used wood.

e)The number of older houses available for dismantling is growing steadily.

Its good that i got hold of the Question stamp correctly. Question demands support for the policy in use not for the new policy. C strengthens by saying it is time saver and cost effective to reuse wood from houses than from trees.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------------------
Target - 720-740
Project PS Butler - https://gmatclub.com/forum/project-ps-butler-practice-everyday-280904.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/information-on-new-gmat-esr-report-beta-221111.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/list-of-one-year-full-time-mba-programs-222103.html

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 374
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2017, 17:09
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1645
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2017, 18:07
the argument structure is really confusing.

Here is what I paraphrase

Premise 1: to save money -> conclusion: dismantle houses & reuse woods (the word "in order to reuse woods" causes confusion; "in order to" is not the purpose here)
premise 2 : earn more money -> use whole trees that are already owned by the company.

question stem: support the first conclusion
question type: both explanation and strengthen
Re: Brothers Inc, a construction company, spends significant &nbs [#permalink] 10 Dec 2017, 18:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by