CR-Prep

Question

Please explain

ng · Answer

B.

catgmat · Answer

would you mind to explain? cheers

dips · Answer

a --> out of scope.
b --> if the compition rises again then the airline can again underprice its fare.
c --> out of scope, talks about competitors not new customers 
d --> again out of scope.
e --> when the total no. of passengers are increased greatly and the prices are high the airline can recover its losses.

stuck between B and E, I would go for E.

syamee_u · Answer

I go with B. explanation holds above.

E - doesn't weaken the argument.

soul_assassin · Answer

If you consider C to be out of scope, isn't E just as out of scope? Whether or not the airline can recover its loss is an assumption.

That said, I go w/ C. Because C states they are lowering prices as a means of promotions. It's not something that's being done over the long-haul.

leeye84 · Answer

I have to go with D. 

It's a weaken question. Therefore, we are trying to discreidt the conclusion or one of the premises. 

The conclusion: Undercutting is a bad idea (no long term profit) because competition could come back and undercut the airline (on the same route). 

To weaken the conclusion, D states: on deciding to stop serving particular routes, airlines shift resources to other routes. Therefore, if the competition moves away from this route, it does not come back to it --> making undercutting a good idea. 

Just my 2 cents.

misterJJ2u · Answer

I'm going to say B as well.

Facts: 
 - some airlines reduce fairs to drive away competition
 - this method is bad for the long run
 - (argument) bad strategy b/c companies would need to increase prices to sustain profits, giving competitors a chance to undercut their prices

We need to attack (weaken) the argument.

(a) references other countries and something about legal vs. illegal. this is all new info not mentioned in the original passage. 
(b) restates key points in the original passage and addresses how companies can keep competitors away. key part of the argument was that competitors would re-emerge.
(c) never mentions anything about promotions to attract new customers.
(d) original passage says nothing about shifting resources or reducing the size of operations
(e) doesn't address the argument that competitors would re-emerge

dips · Answer

mate ! please post the OA.

cheers.

terp26 · Answer

I like E

This states that when they undercut their prices they also increase customers meaning they do not take any net loss in profit, therefore they do not have to worry about charging higher fees to recoup losses because there wouldnt be any

shoonya · Answer

both B and C sound right. C attacks the premise directly, implying that the reason prices are reduced is other than drive out the competition. It is to attract more customers, not necessarily kill the competition. Usually, the premise is left untouched. So, C is not right in my opinion.

B tells us that the company would reduce the prices once again if it feels threatened by the competition. Hence, the competitors may not be able to undercut the fares.

E can't be right. If the number of passengers can increase on a particular route if the fare is reduced, similarly the volume of passengers can decrease too if the fares are increased. 

LM, could you please post the OA and OE now?

dreamgmat1 · Answer

B clearly adresses .

soul_assassin · Answer

Hope someone posts the OA. I bookmarked this question. This one is bugging me.

shoonya · Answer

who else other than LM. are you there MAAN ??

plaguerabbit · Answer

I think he just took his GMAT, so i dont know if he'll be back.

kevincan · Answer

OA=B

CR-Prep

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards