It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 17:28

### 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

# CR - DogFood

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 328

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

Location: Uruguay

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 11:09
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (01:21) correct 50% (01:17) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

CR - DogFood
Attachments

CR - Dog food.jpg [ 53.75 KiB | Viewed 1218 times ]

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 11:52
A - Does question the sales person's claim. But does not weaken. Questioning a claim is not same as weakening it.
B - B would have been perfect if the sales person said. There is no correlation between ingredients of other brands and their sales.
C - Accuses the sales person
D - The company spokes person is talking about decrease in existing ingredients and not the variety of ingredients. The sales person is missing the point here.
E -This comes close. However it does not say clearly whether it is the quantity or the variety.

D would be my first choice and E would be my second.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4285

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 12:51
The analyst refers to the number of variety of meat in dogfood, not the decrease. For instance, dogfood with 20 or 25 varieties of meat could be invariably similar but a decrease to 15 varieties could be considered critical to sales. D is the answer
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 328

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

Location: Uruguay

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 16:57

Although I still don't see it. "The number of varieties" means how many different varieties this dog food has. The first guy says that fewer of this number will hurt the sales. The second guy says that there is no correlation between this number and sales. Meaning that either a decrease or an increase in this number will have no effect on the sales.

Anybody care to explain further please?

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 17:23
I agree with Martin. The spokes person is talking about fewer varities.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 05 Dec 2003
Posts: 47

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

Location: LA

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2004, 22:47
I pick D.

My system: I was looking for an answer that weakens the analyst argument that connects the [u]number of varieties [/u]to sales. D is the only one that speaks of the varieties. See below.

a) Is too broad. What statistics?
b) Maybe...
c) Totally out of scope.. they are trying to get you
d) YES. They talk about the number of varieties.. but most importantly shows the weakness by saying that the analyst should have addressed the decreases in the number of varieties.
e) ingredients is out of scope

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

11 Jan 2004, 22:47
Display posts from previous: Sort by