Consumers will be hurt by the new lower ceiling on halibut catches. Gi

Reasoning: if supply goes down and demand doesn't, the price will increase. If the demand for Halibut does not go down, then the decrease in supply will drive the price up.

(A) The demand for halibut will not decrease substantially after the new restrictions are imposed. Correct. If the demand for halibut does not decrease substantially, the price will increase since there will be less of it.
(B) There is a connection between the supply of halibut and the demand for it. yes but why?
(C) The lost production of halibut will not be replaced by increased production of other fish. Doesn't matter if the production will be replaced by other fish. If the public still demand for Halibut, the price will still increase.
(D) The demand for other fish will be affected by the new restrictions. irrelevant
(E) The amount of halibut consumed represents a very small proportion of all fish consumed. doesn't matter what is the consumption. The issue is demand versus supply

Hi,think that A is correct.
in B we know that there is a connection between suply and demand so we may have proportional decrease in demand following the imposed restrictions on the catch and no price change
C- the demand for other fish will not be affected-we know nothing about possible conection between demand for halibut and demand for other fish
D-the demand for other fish will be affected-how?-up or down, not clear
E- the amount of halibut is a small part-think that this is irrelevant

Consumers will be hurt by the new lower ceilings on halibut catches. Given the law of supply and demand these restrictions are likely to result in an increase in the price of the fish.

Which one of the following, if assumed, would do most to justify the claim that the price of halibut will increase?

(A) The demand for halibut will not decrease substantially after the new restrictions are imposed. if the demand of the halibut remains the same then the prices will increase but if the demand of the halibut also decreases then the prices will not increase.

(B) There is a connection between the supply of halibut and the demand for it.This is opposite logic for the given statement and the demand is not responsible for the restrictions. this choice is a trap answer with similar meaning but is out of scope.

(C) The lost production of halibut will not be replaced by increased production of other fish.other fish is not discussed

(D) The demand for other fish will be affected by the new restrictions.other fish is out of scope

(E) The amount of halibut consumed represents a very small proportion of all fish consumed.the market proportion is not discussed

Consumers will be hurt by the new lower ceilings on halibut catches. Given the law of supply and demand these restrictions are likely to result in an increase in the price of the fish.

Which one of the following, if assumed, would do most to justify the claim that the price of halibut will increase?

(A) The demand for halibut will not decrease substantially after the new restrictions are imposed.
This seems correct at the first instance as fish might be really tasty and its demand might not decrease. Since demand will not decrease price will increase.


(B) There is a connection between the supply of halibut and the demand for it.
There is a inverse relation between demand and supply of every item unless there is a certain other factor acting (For e.g. a new research says that due to the consumption of this fish people will get some serious disease which has been just discovered.). So this is just a statement or rather fact and not a valid assumption for the increase in price of the halibut.

(C) The lost production of halibut will not be replaced by increased production of other fish.

This is out of scope as we don't know if the lost production of halibut will be replaced by increased production of other fish or not. Also we don't know the behaviour of customers who would like to purchase halibut or some alternative. It's a real life trap.

(D) The demand for other fish will be affected by the new restrictions.
Out of scope. We don't know the exact relation between demand of halibut and other fishes. The demand of other fishes might increase but we can't say anything about it. It's a real life trap.

(E) The amount of halibut consumed represents a very small proportion of all fish consumed.
If the consumption of halibut represents a very small proportion of consumption of all fishes. Then also the price might increase slightly. So it also supports the price increase. But A is a better option.

Answer A

GMATNinja Could you please explain why choice B is incorrect? If there is no connection between the demand and supply, how can we conclude that a fall in supply will lead to an increase in the price?

As per my understanding both A and B are valid assumptions

(A) The demand for halibut will not decrease substantially after the new restrictions are imposed. - If the demand does decrease, then the price of the fish will fall. But if the demand does not decrease, then we can reasonably infer that the price of the fish will certainly increase.
Example: assume that 100 people need this fish. If the demand does not decrease, but supply is now at 80, then these 100 people will certainly compete and be willing to pay a higher price for this fish.

Hence, (A) is the right answer choice.

(B) There is a connection between the supply of halibut and the demand for it. - does not help establish the conclusion.

(C) The lost production of halibut will not be replaced by increased production of other fish. - (C) does not tell us exactly how the demand for halibut will be affected. Without knowing the effect on demand, we cannot be certain about how the price may be affected. Hence, (C) does not help establish the conclusion.

(D) The demand for other fish will be affected by the new restrictions. - what happens to the ''other'' fish is irrelevant in the context of this passage.

(E) The amount of halibut consumed represents a very small proportion of all fish consumed. - does not help establish the conclusion.

It’s important to pay close attention to the prompt for this question. It asks:


Although the word “assumed” is used in the question, the prompt doesn’t actually ask us to identify an assumption made by the argument. It asks which of the answer choices, if assumed (much like the “if true” we often see on the GMAT), would help justify the claim that the price of halibut will increase.

With that in mind, take a look at (B):


Because we don’t know what type of connection there is between supply and demand, assuming (B) is true does little to support the claim that the price of halibut will increase. We know that there is a connection between supply and demand, but we don’t know what that connection is. It’s possible that when the supply of halibut decreases there will be a corresponding decrease in demand for halibut, thus prices could remain the same. Eliminate (B).

And here’s (A):


Again, the question doesn’t ask us for one of the argument’s assumptions, but asks us for the answer choice that “would do the most to justify the claim that the price of halibut will increase.” (A) tells us that the demand for halibut will not substantially decrease after the new restrictions are imposed. Given what we know of the law of supply and demand, prices will likely increase as the argument claims. (A) is correct.

I hope that helps!

If we read the question much faster, we would incorrectly mark D. One word changes the meaning. Fish vs the fish.
The fish refers to Halibut. It is the only fish we are talking about. So A makes sense. Choices C,D and E play with this idea, while B talks about the supply demand relationship.
Hope this helps!

Hello GMATNinja
first of all, you know, it's like a relief when i see your response in any question.. i mean the very first thing, once my ans goes wrong, is that i scroll till last and search for your reply .. .

okay now, hmm , in this question i was tricked that it was a assumption question.. applied ANT, B after i applied ANT made the argument fall apart.
But dear.. help me in understanding that this was not an assumption quest, and that next time i could easily figure out.
please !

one more question - had this been an assumption question, how would this have been framed?

tks..

As you suggest, knowing exactly what a question is asking is crucial. So how should we go about analyzing this question? And why is it not an assumption question?

When people say "assumption question," what they often mean is a question asking for an assumption on which the argument relies. In other words, it asks for an assumption that is necessary for the argument to hold.

But just because a question uses the word "assume" or "assumption" doesn't mean it's asking for something necessary for the argument to hold. And if the question isn't asking for something necessary, we wouldn't expect the argument to fall apart without it.

Let's now take a look at the exact wording of this question:


We're asked for the assumption that would "do most to justify the claim..." Since it isn't asking for a necessary assumption, it doesn't fit the typical bill for an "assumption question." All the assumption needs to do in this case is justify the claim. But just because something justifies a claim doesn't make it necessary.

As an example, consider the claim "it's raining," and the statement "there is a puddle outside my window." The fact that there is a puddle would help justify the claim that it's raining (i.e. it would support the idea that it's raining). However, it isn't necessary. Maybe it's raining but no puddles have formed yet outside my window. Just because a statement helps justify a claim doesn't mean it's absolutely NECESSARY for the claim to be true.

Back to the original question -- since we're not looking for a necessary assumption, this isn't what is typically referred to as an "assumption question." And for that reason, we're not looking for something required for the argument to hold up.


If this were an "assumption question," it would have to ask for an assumption that is necessary for the argument to hold. Sometimes, these questions ask for an assumption "on which the argument depends," or "on which the conclusion relies."

That being said, I definitely wouldn't memorize those exact phrases. What makes something an "assumption question" is just that it asks for something necessary for the argument to hold. And the best way to decide if that's the case is to focus on the exact wording, which could be slightly different in each case.

I hope that helps!

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.