It is currently 18 Nov 2017, 01:58

### 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

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 Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2011
Posts: 280

Kudos [?]: 981 [1], given: 23

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jul 2012, 00:58
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

63% (01:18) correct 37% (01:16) wrong based on 352 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 If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.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
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

********************
Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post.

Kudos [?]: 981 [1], given: 23

Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3373

Kudos [?]: 9278 [0], given: 1168

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2012, 11:01
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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
_________________

Kudos [?]: 9278 [0], given: 1168

Intern
Joined: 25 Jan 2013
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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 ??

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 281

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 85

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

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 ??

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.

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 85

Intern
Joined: 28 Nov 2012
Posts: 44

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 3

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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.

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 3

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 291

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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?

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 291

Current Student
Status: Applied
Joined: 02 May 2014
Posts: 164

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 46

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

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.

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 46

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 323

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 101

Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2016, 05:39
The answer has to be option E. Well explained above
_________________

" The few , the fearless "

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 101

Senior Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2016
Posts: 406

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 197

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V34
GPA: 3.8
WE: Operations (Commercial Banking)
Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jul 2016, 11:10
1
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 197

Intern
Status: GMAT on july 13.
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 23

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 19

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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..

so I went for B.

Can someone please explain it clearly ?

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 19

Re: Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction   [#permalink] 02 Jul 2017, 03:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by