Business analysts remain divided over the reasons behind the declining

Answer to question no. 2 seems incorrect. Experts please help

In Q) 2

C & E are close going by the question statistics.

C - Incorrect because "removal of once stable forces" is NOT THE SAME as "Failure of older companies"

E - Is what the 2nd paragraph is all about.

In Q) 3

D & E are close

E - Incorrect because of the following logic.

A leads to B & C does not imply B leads to C.option E says B leads to C.Incorrect.

D - Mentioned in the 2nd half of para 1

Cheerio lads!!!!

in oe for question 2 is e but when aftergmat gave explanation it is said that ans was C

You are right the OA of question #2 is C, Edited accordingly.

Thank you

VeritasKarishma Thanks for the explanation.

Now it makes a lot of sense.

The author is not preaching what is good what is bad.
He is simply stating 2 viewpoints without nudging towards any specific one.
(Can we say the passage to be a descriptive / informative one ?)

Since author does not talk of any mitigations for the business lifecycle reduction, we should not jump towards a conclusion (Because question asks what the author will agree with)

Author maintains a neutral stance, hence (c) with MAY is a better option.

Apologies for the wrong answer. I have updated the OA

kindly explain how you got to the answers of both questions.

Dear VeritasKarishma ,
Recently the OA was changed from C to E. Please confirm.

In question 2 I have a doubt in option C analysis:
The option says,"the failure of older companies may lead to greater instability within once-stable industries" --> Here:
1. industries = automobile, food, telecom industry OR
2. Industries = companies

As per the last sentence of paragraph 1: the instability is brought in the market and not the company.
For instance, a launch of a product may bring industry in the market, but the company may remain stable.

In case the OA is E, is the following reasoning correct?
There are host of problems that lead to decreasing the average lifespans of the companies. Even if one of the problem, uncertainty, is fixed the company has to deal with other problems. Hence, unless all the other problems are solved, the "lifespan issue" definitely cannot be resolved.

GMATNinjaTwo GMATNinja Can you please explain OA for question 2

Ans for Q#2 should be C and not E. Please confirm.

aftergmat But isn't (C) the opinion of some analysts? How can we conclude that the author agrees with it?

VeritasKarishma Can you please help with a breakdown of answer choices C and E for Q2 ?

My reasoning for E:
Since some companies are purposefully built for acquisitions, even after eliminating market instability, some companies would still have shorter lifespans.

Should E be eliminated based on following reasoning?
Even if some companies continue to have shorter lifespans because that's their purpose, we would reduce collapse of companies which were happening because of market instability.

Here is the crux of the passage:

Business analysts remain divided over the reasons behind the declining average lifespan of publicly traded companies.

- Some business analysts point to structural changes in the economy to explain this change. And the author explains what "structural changes" they are talking about.
- A growing number of analysts, however, contend that modern companies are purposefully built to encourage shorter business lifespans. And the author explains what they say.

The author focuses on the fact that analysts are divided over the reasons. Some say that it is due to structural change, while others say that it is due to the way modern companies are built.

2. The author of this passage would most likely agree with which of the following?

The author doesn't give much of his own input except to say that they analysts are divided. Let's see.

A. It is important for business analysts to come to a consensus about the drivers of declining company lifespan

No. The author just says that they are divided. Is it important for them to come to a consensus? He doesn't say or imply.

B. It is important to increase average company lifespan in order to increase marketplace stability and institutional knowledge.

No. He explains how less stability could have led to shorter lifespan. Does increase in stability need increased lifespan? He doesn't say or imply.

C. The failure of older companies may lead to greater instability within once-stable industries.

The author does explain this in first paragraph:
...As larger, older businesses failed ..., the market was left open to an influx of smaller companies. However, these businesses were left with a host of problems, ... Further, the removal of once-stable forces within the marketplace led to instability that made it more difficult for newer companies to survive ...
So failure of older companies led to influx of new companies which had a host of problems and it all led to greater instability. He would likely agree that this is possible. So he would likely agree that failure of older companies MAY lead to greater instability.


D. In order for startups to survive once they become public, they should focus on long term growth rather than technological innovation.
He does not mention long term growth anywhere and doesn't say what start-ups need to do to survive.

E. Eliminating uncertainty within the marketplace will not decrease the problem of declining company lifespans.

He does not talk about what will reverse declining lifespans. He only talks about the possible reasons for the current scenario of declining lifespans.

Answer (C)