Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
62% (01:51) correct
38%
(02:06)
wrong
based on 13566
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.
The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?
A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.
CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION
The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?
A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.
CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION
Argument Construction
Situation
Pirated DVDs of films are released earlier than the film's official DVD release day. They are also sold more cheaply. These practices cut into the revenue expected from a film's official DVD sales. According to Ramirez, the prevalence of piracy indicates that consumers want lower prices and earlier release. He concludes that if the official DVDs were sold more cheaply and released earlier, the impact of piracy on film industry profits might be reduced.
Reasoning
What must Ramirez assume for his argument to be logically correct? Suppose none of the current purchasers of pirated film DVDs were to purchase the official DVDs even if these were released earlier and at a significantly lower price. If that were to occur, then the measures Ramirez suggests would not mitigate piracy.
(A) This does not have to be assumed for Ramirez's reasoning to be logically good. Earlier release of the official DVDs at a lower price could somewhat reduce revenue from movie theater showings of the films. But if the revenue from official DVDs released earlier and priced lower were greatly boosted through greatly increased official DVD sales, overall revenue for each film could be higher than would be the case with widespread piracy.
(B) Correct. If all existing purchasers of pirated film DVDs continued to purchase such DVDs even after implementation of the changes Ramirez advocates, then the changes would not mitigate the destructive consequences of piracy. Thus, Ramirez's reasoning must assume that the changes he recommends would cause at least some former purchasers of pirated DVDs to begin purchasing the official DVDs.
(C) This might improve profits provided revenue did not also decline. Ramirez's argument does not depend on the assumption that the cost of producing DVDs will decline. His reasoning assumes that total sales volume for official DVDs would increase if piracy were reduced.
(D) Ideally this would occur with the change Ramirez recommends, but it does not have to be assumed for his reasoning to be logically good. For example, the result Ramirez predicts could occur if all existing sellers of pirated DVDs continued to sell them but sold fewer.
(E) This is likely true but is not an assumption that Ramirez needs to make for his reasoning to be logically good. Even if some DVDs sold by DVD sellers were pirated without the sellers being aware of it, e.g., if they purchased them from a fraudulent wholesaler, the fact that the pirated DVDs are sold more cheaply and before the release of the official DVD would reduce the filmmakers’ total revenue.
Situation
Pirated DVDs of films are released earlier than the film's official DVD release day. They are also sold more cheaply. These practices cut into the revenue expected from a film's official DVD sales. According to Ramirez, the prevalence of piracy indicates that consumers want lower prices and earlier release. He concludes that if the official DVDs were sold more cheaply and released earlier, the impact of piracy on film industry profits might be reduced.
Reasoning
What must Ramirez assume for his argument to be logically correct? Suppose none of the current purchasers of pirated film DVDs were to purchase the official DVDs even if these were released earlier and at a significantly lower price. If that were to occur, then the measures Ramirez suggests would not mitigate piracy.
(A) This does not have to be assumed for Ramirez's reasoning to be logically good. Earlier release of the official DVDs at a lower price could somewhat reduce revenue from movie theater showings of the films. But if the revenue from official DVDs released earlier and priced lower were greatly boosted through greatly increased official DVD sales, overall revenue for each film could be higher than would be the case with widespread piracy.
(B) Correct. If all existing purchasers of pirated film DVDs continued to purchase such DVDs even after implementation of the changes Ramirez advocates, then the changes would not mitigate the destructive consequences of piracy. Thus, Ramirez's reasoning must assume that the changes he recommends would cause at least some former purchasers of pirated DVDs to begin purchasing the official DVDs.
(C) This might improve profits provided revenue did not also decline. Ramirez's argument does not depend on the assumption that the cost of producing DVDs will decline. His reasoning assumes that total sales volume for official DVDs would increase if piracy were reduced.
(D) Ideally this would occur with the change Ramirez recommends, but it does not have to be assumed for his reasoning to be logically good. For example, the result Ramirez predicts could occur if all existing sellers of pirated DVDs continued to sell them but sold fewer.
(E) This is likely true but is not an assumption that Ramirez needs to make for his reasoning to be logically good. Even if some DVDs sold by DVD sellers were pirated without the sellers being aware of it, e.g., if they purchased them from a fraudulent wholesaler, the fact that the pirated DVDs are sold more cheaply and before the release of the official DVD would reduce the filmmakers’ total revenue.
28 Apr 2019, 10:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
VidhyaN
Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):
1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.
2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.
3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.
Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:
Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would
At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.
With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:
Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.
That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:
1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.
2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.
3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.
29 Apr 2019, 08:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
Quote:
Yeah, really good question. I've always looked at Assumption Negation this way:
1) If you have a qualifier like "some," "not all," "all," "none," "only," etc. as part of the subject of an answer choice, negate that.
For example: "Some people would buy DVDs" --> "No people would buy DVDs"
2) If you don't have that, negate the primary verb in the sentence.
For example "People would buy DVDs if they were cheaper" --> "People would not buy DVDs if they were cheaper"
3) If you're unsure, try a few option of where you negate and if you do find one that cripples the conclusion, that's a good answer to keep around. If that happens on multiple choices, then go back to the argument and try to really understand the flaw now that you've seen some potential weaknesses.
#1 is important though, because think of what happens if you negate the verb in "some people would buy DVDs":
"Some people would buy DVDs" --> "Some people would not buy DVDs"
Those two almost exactly same the same thing ("some would" doesn't *always* mean "some wouldn't" but usually it does). So you're not really negating the statement there: you're essentially just reinforcing it. That's why it's so important to go after the some/all/none qualifier: that's where the real negation happens if you have one of those qualifiers in the subject.
