Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 2
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 Feb 2017, 21:04

### 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
Your Progress

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

# Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 06 Sep 2009
Posts: 115
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 3

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2009, 14:45
Guys, please tag the source!
Intern
Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Posts: 47
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2009, 17:11
imo C

conclusion: It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger (not stronger than chemical devison) i belive in this case it would b E

but judging by the previuse year figure , it just growing stronger...

to come to conclusion officer just comparies figures ... not divisions with each other
Senior Manager
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 330
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 241 [0], given: 27

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2011, 10:07
I think C only makes sense
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Manager
Status: Time to apply!
Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Posts: 220
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V29
GMAT 3: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.2
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 119 [0], given: 166

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2011, 19:29
+1 C
_________________

Didn't give up !!! Still Trying!!

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 911
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 74

Kudos [?]: 621 [0], given: 44

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2011, 01:28
I will go with C
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Manager
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 186
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, International Business
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V37
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Dec 2011, 11:22
C
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 195
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 6

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2012, 21:41
I find C & E equally good....

C states pharma doesn't need to perform good to get given result.

E states we don't know company has only these 2 divisions.......
Intern
Joined: 24 May 2012
Posts: 13
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 4

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2012, 01:06
I can understand why C is correct. But what's wrong with D?
Say the profit last year was 100$, then 20$ was the profit from pharma
Say the profit this year is 10$, then 45% is only 4.5$.
So with this data we cannot conclude that pharma section is growing. So what D states is right, isn't it?
Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2014
Posts: 20
Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA (PGPX)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 1

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2014, 08:35
Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporation’s profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporation’s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.
On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above

Quite simple question based on %.

Conclusion: pharmaceutical division is growing stronger
Premise : Its percentage share/share in profits is growing.

Key: In averages ,percentages, proportions simply remember percent %= (target group)/ (totalgroup) .
Pre assumption : Total group is shrinking , then percent can increase easily even when target group remains constant.

The percentage of the corporation’s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division’s performance had not improved
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10624
Followers: 941

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Sep 2015, 01:00
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.
Intern
Joined: 21 May 2015
Posts: 15
Location: United States
WE: Brand Management (Consumer Products)
Followers: 0

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

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2015, 02:42
Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporation’s profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporation’s profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.
On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?
(A) The increase in the pharmaceutical division’s contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.
(B) In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporation’s profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.
(C) The percentage of the corporation’s profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division’s performance had not improved.
(D) The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.
(E) The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

I chose C because : " the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger " The percentage share of PD do not increase but the but the total profit decreased. So that leads to the increase in the PD share of profits.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10624
Followers: 941

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2016, 13:37
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.
Re: Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for   [#permalink] 13 Sep 2016, 13:37

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 32 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Due to budget constraints for the upcoming year, the corporate office 4 22 Nov 2015, 10:09
21 Over the last ten years, the Office of the Provost has 13 27 Mar 2012, 08:40
27 Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for 19 01 Nov 2010, 07:39
Corporate officers and directors commonly buy and sell, for 7 27 Dec 2007, 03:28
Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for 7 19 Jul 2007, 11:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.