Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 16 Jul 2019, 11:32

Close

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Retired Moderator
avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2011
Posts: 203
Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2012, 00:58
1
3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

67% (01:41) correct 33% (01:52) wrong based on 508 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics


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 If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.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.


Main CR Qs link - http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-qs-600-700 ... 31508.html

_________________
********************
Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post.
Board of Directors
User avatar
D
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3421
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2012, 11:01
1
mohankumarbd 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.


Main CR Qs link - cr-qs-600-700-level-131508.html


Red ---------> Conclusion

So only A and E have sense but the second is an evidence about the conclusion. Is a statement PRO not against the conclusion as you can see in A.

Tricky one. Always in Bold question spot the conclusion :)

Hope this helps you ;)
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Jan 2013
Posts: 1
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2013, 06:52
I agree 'E' is the correct answer but why is B incorrect ?? Isn't the first bold face an assumption made by the corporate strategist ?? :roll:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 230
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2013, 07:31
SrishtiSoin wrote:
I agree 'E' is the correct answer but why is B incorrect ?? Isn't the first bold face an assumption made by the corporate strategist ?? :roll:


Imo

the assumption is already there : 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.

The use of However, I believe that shows the corporate strategist's position
_________________
KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

"If you don't change your life, your life will change you"
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Nov 2012
Posts: 34
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2013, 16:24
Best advice I've gotten for these types of CR is to mentally examine the context of the two statements separate then compare how one affects one another. the answer then normally pops right out at you.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 195
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Oct 2013, 00:15
i thought the main position is that our cars will lose their appeal. isn't believe another word for assumption?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Applied
Joined: 02 May 2014
Posts: 125
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
GPA: 3.35
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Mar 2015, 00:52
Clearly E is the answer. the strategist is thinking of the position which is the first portion and is giving evidence supporting his position which is portion second.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 421
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.33
Reviews Badge
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2016, 05:39
The answer has to be option E. Well explained above
_________________
" The few , the fearless "
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2016
Posts: 376
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V34
GPA: 3.8
WE: Operations (Commercial Banking)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2016, 11:10
1
While E is the correct answer in a CR questions terming the last sentence as "Evidence" is corny in my view as evidence must come out of a study / widely accepted "fact" , etc as there are subtle differences among - Fact , Hypothesis, Theory, Evidence et al. So far in my preparation I have seen GMAT retired questions play with these and many fail to correctly identify the difference between the aforesaid. I think if one can identify whether one of the statement is a theory or hypothesis or fact or assumption or evidence , a bold face can be cracked easily. Just my view.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Status: GMAT on july 13.
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 36
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V30
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2017, 03:21
carcass wrote:
mohankumarbd 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.


Main CR Qs link - http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-qs-600-700 ... 31508.html


Red ---------> Conclusion

So only A and E have sense but the second is an evidence about the conclusion. Is a statement PRO not against the conclusion as you can see in A.

Tricky one. Always in Bold question spot the conclusion :)

Hope this helps you ;)



How do we identify the conclusion here?
it is said, I believe ....
looks as if, the second bold sentence is conclusion and the first is what the strategist uses(his belief) to conclude..
:shock: :(
so I went for B.

Can someone please explain it clearly ?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 May 2017
Posts: 106
Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Oct 2018, 20:23
[quote="GetThisDone"]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.


Option 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." first boldface statement is actually what the corporate strategist assumes " However, I believe that" so shouldn't this choice be true.
How can we reject this choice?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 13
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Oct 2018, 20:32
zac123 wrote:
GetThisDone 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.


Option 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." first boldface statement is actually what the corporate strategist assumes " However, I believe that" so shouldn't this choice be true.
How can we reject this choice?


Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 13
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Oct 2018, 20:37
1
[size=80][b][i]Posted from my mobile device[/i][/b][/size]

Options b uses the word assumption but as you can see in first boldface it's not an assumption but a clear statement or I must his position , had it been an assumption it would have been either unstated or hidden or unsaid or in indirect form which is not the case
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 26 Jun 2017
Posts: 404
Location: Russian Federation
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
WE: Information Technology (Other)
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jan 2019, 04:51
GetThisDone 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.


Main CR Qs link - http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-qs-600-700 ... 31508.html


This question is flawed in my opinion.
There is no one "evidence" in this passage, and yet this word is used in almost all options.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction   [#permalink] 05 Jan 2019, 04:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction

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





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne