It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 06:11

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Economist: In the interaction between producers and

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

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Economist: In the interaction between producers and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2005, 13:53
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (02:10) correct 50% (01:29) wrong based on 8 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Economist: In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side. And distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer. So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economist's argument?

A) It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.
B) No one expects producers to act in a manner counter to their own best interests.
C) Any product defect is likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
D) A product defect is more likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

 Economist GMAT Tutor Discount Codes Veritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes Magoosh Discount Codes
Manager
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 129

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Location: Los Angeles
Re: CR - Economist [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2005, 14:41
gmataquaguy wrote:
Economist: In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side. And distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer. So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economist's argument?

A) It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.
B) No one expects producers to act in a manner counter to their own best interests.
C) Any product defect is likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
D) A product defect is more likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

A.

Conclusion: consumers' best interest is to report defects, producers' best interest is not to report defects

Assumption for the first part of conclusion is in the paragraph, no argument made for the second part.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 163

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Location: Atlanta , GA

### Show Tags

12 May 2005, 21:04
Main point of the argument

In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side.

the argument:
consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Assumption stated : distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer

So another assumption must be

It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.

so the answer is 'A'

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Nov 2004
Posts: 1481

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Economist [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2005, 21:19
A seems.
tough between A and E.
gmataquaguy wrote:
A) It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

are C and D same?
gmataquaguy wrote:
C) Any product defect is likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
D) A product defect is more likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 850

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 May 2005, 08:09
I will go with C.
Whew between C & D it was like reading a SC. The conclusion of the argument is "consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them"

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Economist [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2005, 07:29
gmataquaguy wrote:
Economist: In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side. And distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer. So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economist's argument?

A) It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.
B) No one expects producers to act in a manner counter to their own best interests.
C) Any product defect is likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
D) A product defect is more likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

The OA is A. I was torn between A and E and here is why:

Conclusion: So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Question Type: Assumption.

Solution: Negate the AC and see if the conclusion still holds true.

Negate AC A: It is always [opposite of never, hence the negation] in the best interest of the producers for a producer to reveal a product defect.

If AC A is true, will the conclusion still hold? No. Details below:

If "it is always in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defect" then the conclusion portion "while producers are never obligated to reveal them" breaks down.

Let me do the same with E

Negate AC E: The interests of consumers always [opposite of never, hence the negation] coincides with the best interests of producers.

If AC E is true, will the conclusion still hold? No. Details below:

If "the best interests of consumers always coincide with the best interests of producers" then the conclusion "So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them" will not hold because "while producers are never obligated" breaks down.

Why because best interests of consumers = best interest of producers. So if best interest of consumer equates to reveal product defects & best interest of consumers = best interest of producers then the portion of the conclusion "producers are never obligated to reveal them" BREAKS DOWN.

So where is the fallicy in this reasoning? Please help

Last edited by gmataquaguy on 14 May 2005, 10:28, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 235

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 May 2005, 08:48
A looked good, and we had some nice explanation there.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 555

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 May 2005, 11:08
I am also totally lost here because it seems (A) and (E) are similar. Negate both and the argument falls apart.

Meenu, what was your reason for eliminating (E)?

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 May 2005, 19:37
Bumping up this thread. Anyone?

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 15 [1], given: 0

Location: Austin, Texas
Re: CR - Economist [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2005, 21:25
1
This post received
KUDOS
gmataquaguy wrote:
gmataquaguy wrote:
Economist: In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side. And distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer. So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economist's argument?
.......
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

Let me do the same with E

Negate AC E: The interests of consumers always [opposite of never, hence the negation] coincides with the best interests of producers.

If AC E is true, will the conclusion still hold? No. Details below:

If "the best interests of consumers always coincide with the best interests of producers" then the conclusion "So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them" will not hold because "while producers are never obligated" breaks down.

Why because best interests of consumers = best interest of producers. So if best interest of consumer equates to reveal product defects & best interest of consumers = best interest of producers then the portion of the conclusion "producers are never obligated to reveal them" BREAKS DOWN.

So where is the fallicy in this reasoning? Please help

Two issues that I think clarify why (E) would be the wrong choice.

1) (E) makes no mention of the word defect, or how anyone should behave with respect to reporting defects. Don't read too much into (E). It says what it literally says, and nothing else.

2) You can negate a never with a sometimes .... you do not have to resort to the extreme of always.

Keeping those two facts in mind, let's negate (E) and see if the passage can still stand on its own.

Negation of (E): The interests of consumers sometimes coincides with the best interests of producers.

Can this negated version of (E) be assumed, and yet the passage about reporting defects still be valid?

YES. Of course interests will sometimes coincide. Or else a transaction would never take place. When something is exchanged in the marketplace, that transaction is in the best interests of both the producer (or else he would not sell the product at the agreed price) and of the consumer (or else he would not buy at the agreed price). The issue of reporting defects is irrelevent to this fact, and vice versa.

For that matter, it is in their mutual best interests that a meteor not fall from the sky and destroy civilization.

Hence, (E)-negated is completely consistent with the passage, therefore original (E) is not a necessary assumption.

Kudos [?]: 15 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 84

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

### Show Tags

17 May 2005, 02:24
A

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

Director
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 698

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Economist [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 May 2005, 16:49
Supercat wrote:

Two issues that I think clarify why (E) would be the wrong choice.

1) (E) makes no mention of the word defect, or how anyone should behave with respect to reporting defects. Don't read too much into (E). It says what it literally says, and nothing else.

2) You can negate a never with a sometimes .... you do not have to resort to the extreme of always.

Keeping those two facts in mind, let's negate (E) and see if the passage can still stand on its own.

Negation of (E): The interests of consumers sometimes coincides with the best interests of producers.

Can this negated version of (E) be assumed, and yet the passage about reporting defects still be valid?

YES. Of course interests will sometimes coincide. Or else a transaction would never take place. When something is exchanged in the marketplace, that transaction is in the best interests of both the producer (or else he would not sell the product at the agreed price) and of the consumer (or else he would not buy at the agreed price). The issue of reporting defects is irrelevent to this fact, and vice versa.

For that matter, it is in their mutual best interests that a meteor not fall from the sky and destroy civilization.

Hence, (E)-negated is completely consistent with the passage, therefore original (E) is not a necessary assumption.

Thanks again for this wonderful explanation Supercat.

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 47

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 May 2005, 20:23
That's correct. "Sometimes" is the key.
_________________

krish

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 47

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 May 2005, 20:25
That's correct. "Sometimes" is the key. Also, when in doubt, pick a choice that is closest to the scope of the argument (mentions what is being argued or concluded)
_________________

krish

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 453

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 May 2005, 20:30
nice explanation, supercat...

A it is.

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 11 Jul 2013
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 92

Re: Economist: In the interaction between producers and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2013, 01:13
gmataquaguy wrote:
Economist: In the interaction between producers and consumers, the only obligation that all parties have is to act in the best interests of their own side. And distribution of information about product defects is in the best interests of the consumer. So consumers are always obligated to report product defects they discover, while producers are never obligated to reveal them.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economist's argument?

A) It is never in the best interests of producers for a producer to reveal a product defeat.
B) No one expects producers to act in a manner counter to their own best interests.
C) Any product defect is likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
D) A product defect is more likely to be discovered by a consumer than by a producer.
E) The best interests of consumers never coincide with the best interests of producers.

C is also a valid assumption. If we're given that consumers cannot discover defects then the argument will not hold... Or will it?
thanks in advance...

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 92

Re: Economist: In the interaction between producers and   [#permalink] 19 Aug 2013, 01:13
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Economist: In the interaction between producers and

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

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.