Bunuel wrote:
Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the price of a good results in an increase in the demand for this product, leading to higher sales. However, I believe that the management’s strategy of stimulating the sales of our luxury cars by implementing a series of aggressive price reductions is seriously flawed. Dramatic price reductions on our luxury cars will erode the image of exclusivity and premium quality associated with these vehicles. If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.
Which of the following statements best describes the role of each portion in boldface in the argument above?
A. The first represents the main position of the corporate strategist; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that position.
B. The first is an assumption made by the corporate strategist about the efficacy of the management’s strategy; the second is evidence that supports the strategist’s reasoning.
C. The first is evidence supporting the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is that position.
D. The first is evidence supporting the position of the corporate strategist; the second is a generalization that will not hold in the case at issue.
E. The first is the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is evidence in support of that position.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
The corporate strategist begins the argument by describing the usual relationship between the reduction in price and the resulting effect on product demand. After describing the traditional relationship, he concludes, however, that the management’s price-reduction strategy is flawed. Thus, the first statement in boldface represents the conclusion of the corporate strategist. Finally, the strategist finishes his argument by providing evidence that justifies his reasoning. Therefore, the second statement in boldface provides evidence that supports the main position of the corporate strategist.
(A) This answer choice correctly describes the first statement but incorrectly states that the second statement weighs against rather than supports the main position of the equity strategist.
(B) This answer choice incorrectly states that the first statement represents an assumption made by the strategist. Remember that assumptions are never stated in the body of the argument. The second statement is correctly described as evidence supporting the strategist’s reasoning.
(C) This answer choice incorrectly labels the first statement as evidence supporting the conclusion and the second statement as the conclusion itself. The order of the two descriptions should be the reverse of that presented in this answer choice.
(D) This answer choice incorrectly describes the first statement as evidence rather than the conclusion, and incorrectly states that the scenario outlined in the second statement will not hold in the case at issue.
(E) CORRECT. This answer correctly describes the first statement as the strategist’s conclusion and the second statement as the evidence supporting that conclusion.