Last visit was: 12 Jun 2025, 17:15 It is currently 12 Jun 2025, 17:15
Close
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
cialit0506
Joined: 01 May 2009
Last visit: 10 May 2010
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
281
 [151]
Posts: 25
Kudos: 281
 [151]
16
Kudos
Add Kudos
133
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
73,632
 [32]
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
 [32]
26
Kudos
Add Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
getmba
Joined: 07 Jul 2009
Last visit: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 110
Own Kudos:
754
 [10]
Given Kudos: 13
Posts: 110
Kudos: 754
 [10]
9
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
learner
Joined: 30 Jul 2009
Last visit: 08 Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
111
 [8]
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 21
Kudos: 111
 [8]
8
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products - this has no effect on per capita expenditure

B. The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period - this would decrease per capita expenditure

C. Improvements in manufacturing processes enable drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze. - nothing to do with increase in per capita expenditure

D. In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions
- people would have started to buy less expensive generic medicine and per capita expenditure would have gone done, therfore government's action would have worked. BUt the q is why government's action didn't work.

E. After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia. - as the usage of prescription drug didn't change, people would have started to buy these drugs outside voronia and pay additional shipping costs eventually rising the per capita expenditure. So the governmet's action didn't work.


Whats OA ?
User avatar
sudeep
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Last visit: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 248
Own Kudos:
1,163
 [3]
Given Kudos: 106
GMAT 2: 720  Q50  V36
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Posts: 248
Kudos: 1,163
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
getMBA already gave nice explanation for A.

Total drugss sold same.
per capita increased ==> cost of drugs increased
price of old drugs, drugs already existed in the market, not increased

How is that possible? New drugs have the higher prices than older ones reulting in per-capita expense on drugs to increase.
User avatar
gmat1011
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Last visit: 22 Dec 2012
Posts: 139
Own Kudos:
235
 [8]
Given Kudos: 20
Posts: 139
Kudos: 235
 [8]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sly:)... they found the loophole.

Law says: you can't increase the price.

Businessman: ok. I will manufacture a new product (with slight changes) and put it in the market and charge a high price to begin with - then the price ceiling can't stop me from charging the price I want.
User avatar
DJK
Joined: 25 Mar 2011
Last visit: 28 Oct 2013
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
16
 [5]
Given Kudos: 1
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmat1011
sly:)... they found the loophole.

Law says: you can't increase the price.

Businessman: ok. I will manufacture a new product (with slight changes) and put it in the market and charge a high price to begin with - then the price ceiling can't stop me from charging the price I want.


+1.

This is a relatively easy question, mainly due to the other answer choices sort of "suck" for lack of a better word.

We are desperately searching for why? Why is per capita spending still increasing? Whyyyyy?

A. New product doesn't mean price increase. An increase inherently means something exists, then increases. A new product can be set at any price. So, hypothetically, we could have the same number of people, now purchasing new and more expensive products. Hence, per capita spending is still increasing. These basta*** are getting rid of the old products and then creating replacements that are more expensive. Ding Ding Ding - sounds pretty logical, boys and girls...but let's move on.

B. B states population rose, but the stimulus mentions that usage didn't increase. So, who cares and I am still confused.

C. Whoop de doo for these businesses. We are trying to find out why per capita expenditure on these drugs are increasing, even though the usage isn't increasing, nor is the price of the current drugs. But, I will entertain this bull****. Let's assume the costs of the businesses went down from these new manufacturing processes. Terrific. So, these businesses' profits increase! Yay, P = R - C. Yay MBA stuff. So, presumably, we have lower costs, higher profits, but same price. So, uhhhh, why did the spending per capita increase? And why do I care about businesses' profits? I don't. C = irrelevant - leave me alone.

D. This furthers the confusion. So, usage doesn't go up - per the stimulus. And apparently, drugs are now cheaper. However, per capita spending is still increasing. WHAT IS THIS MADNESS?!?!

E. Well isn't this terrific. This answer choice causes me to waste 10 seconds of my test-taking life. Stimulus states: usage doesn't increase. Stimulus also states prices of current drugs do not increase. This answer choice is weak on several levels. What if these foreign manufacturers of drugs NEVER actually sold any of their drugs? Meaning, if they stopped marketing, who gives a sh**? Their products were never purchased in the first place, in other words, their products never had ANY affect on per capita spending! Laugh at this answer choice, roll your eyes, select A and mock the GMAT gods for trying to fool you.

Not. This. Time.

This is a great example of active vs. passive reading. Whenever you read a stimulus, try and attack its holes - rather than read, and hope an answer choice will make sense. I rarely read the question stem prior to the stimulus, yet again, I was an LSATter. It is a waste of time to read something twice ;). I feel if you attack CR with an active mind, you will perform beautifully. And, have fun with it!

HTH
User avatar
budablasta
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Last visit: 19 Apr 2017
Posts: 195
Own Kudos:
89
 [7]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Said
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V44
GPA: 2.9
WE:Marketing (Computer Software)
Schools: Said
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V44
Posts: 195
Kudos: 89
 [7]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Per capita expenditure = (Price x Volume)/ Population

So, for per capita expenditure to rise, any of 3 things have to happen
1) Price increases,
2) Volume increases,
3) Population decreases

Now, let's look at the choices

A) Will come back to this last.

B) Population increased. My formula tells me population can't increase. NOT B

C) High profit levels. Who gives a ****. NOT C

D) Generic drugs. Which means lower prices. My formula tells me prices need to increase. NOT D

E) No more marketing. Who gives a ****. NOT E.

A) That leaves us with A. Simple elimination. Now it could be possible that the new medications were more expensive. Higher prices. Satisfies my formula. Or the medications were not more expensive, but you don't know for sure. So, A is the "best" answer because all other choices are clearly wrong
User avatar
Lstadt
Joined: 08 Jun 2011
Last visit: 21 Oct 2013
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 65
Posts: 62
Kudos: 76
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Is this a Weaken or resolve the paradox question?

It seems to me that it is a resolve since we have two contradicting sets of facts. But what makes this a possibility for a weaken question is that it has a conclusion.

Any help to explain what question type this is?
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Lstadt
Is this a Weaken or resolve the paradox question?

It seems to me that it is a resolve since we have two contradicting sets of facts. But what makes this a possibility for a weaken question is that it has a conclusion.

Any help to explain what question type this is?

It is a 'resolve the paradox' question. There is a paradox here:
There is price freeze and more medicine is not being sold. Still, per capita expenditure is increasing.
You have to explain the paradox.
User avatar
thevenus
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Last visit: 17 Dec 2024
Posts: 318
Own Kudos:
1,425
 [5]
Given Kudos: 76
Status:Final Countdown
Location: United States (NY)
GPA: 3.82
WE:Account Management (Retail Banking)
Posts: 318
Kudos: 1,425
 [5]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Assume, there were 100 different types of medicines available in the market on which govt. froze the prices(that a particular drug will cost $X, and no chemist or druggist can charge more than the fixed price on the drug).It is also mentioned that the consumption of drugs stayed constant.Then how can the per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year?

May possible that the drug manufacturers started making more variety of drugs.(The listed drugs were 100 now 150; 50 new varieties are in market , and govt is unaware of those 5o drugs but the chemists are charging more and more for those new medicines.)hence per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year.
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,336
 [2]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,336
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products ----- This is one way commercial corporations can survive and keep their profits steady. Since new drugs do not suffer price control. Drug manufactures make merry and hay while the sun shines. That is the reason govt. controls most of the times bite the dust


B. The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period. ---- Per capita takes into account of the fluctuations and then evens out.

C. Improvements in manufacturing processes enable drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze. ----improvements are not part of the agenda in this topic. We naturally believe that all the possible improvements are already in place. No company will keep improvements at bay, waiting for the price controls to arrive. Using generic versions, should bring down the cost and help reduce per capita prescription drugs figure.

D. In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions – The discussion is about expenditure of branded prescription products This is also antithetical, since any use of generic versions, should then help bring down the per capita figure rather than raise

E. After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia. availability of expensive or inexpensive drugs do not decide the per capita figure. It is the usage. Hence not relevant.
User avatar
mbaiseasy
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Last visit: 29 Dec 2013
Posts: 323
Own Kudos:
1,975
 [3]
Given Kudos: 11
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GPA: 3.23
Posts: 323
Kudos: 1,975
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription drugs in Voronia rose by fifteen percent or more annually. In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products’ prices. Even though use of prescription drugs did not expand after this price freeze, per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the ministry’s action did not achieve its goal?

A. After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products
Any of the existing products cannot have increased price. But if there were more new products introduce, then perhaps these contributed to the increase in per capita presc. drug prescription. Sneak manufacturers! CORRECT!

B. The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period.
Since it is about the per capita, then the total population doesn't matter. And say this increase are non-prescription users, then that would not explain the increase in per capita...

C. Improvements in manufacturing processes enable drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze.
Profits are irrelevant.

D. In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions
This should decrease rather than increase...

E. After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia.
This should decrease rather than increase

Answer: A
avatar
Pavas786
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Jul 2016
Posts: 1
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
But how is it implied that new drugs will be costlier as compared to the old one?
Please explain.
Thanks
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
73,632
 [1]
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pavas786
But how is it implied that new drugs will be costlier as compared to the old one?
Please explain.
Thanks

You are given:

"Even though use of prescription drugs did not expand after this price freeze, per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year"

The use of drugs remained the same, price did not increase so how come per capita expenditure continued to increase? If people are still using 10 tabs a month and the price of the 10 tabs is still the same, why are they paying more? Because the 10 tabs they are consuming now are different from the previous 10 tabs and are more expensive than the previous ones. The manufacturers are replacing existing products with new medicines - the price of which they can keep according to what suits them. They are pricing them higher and that is how the expense of medicines is increasing.
User avatar
GGMU
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Feb 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2018
Posts: 184
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 164
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3
WE:Project Management (Manufacturing)
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
cialit0506
For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription drugs in Voronia rose by fifteen percent or more annually. In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products’ prices. Even though use of prescription drugs did not expand after this price freeze, per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the ministry’s action did not achieve its goal?

A. After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products
B. The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period
C. Improvements in manufacturing processes enable drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze.
D. In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions
E. After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia.

I cannot get my head round the reasonings of the OA. No matter how I look at it, D seems the best answer. If D is true, wouldn’t per capita expenditure of drugs increase?

Can anyone explain why option A is correct?
Argument says
In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products’ prices
A says:
drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products
So the new medications should also be governed by the same rule.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
anurag16
cialit0506
For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription drugs in Voronia rose by fifteen percent or more annually. In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products’ prices. Even though use of prescription drugs did not expand after this price freeze, per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the ministry’s action did not achieve its goal?

A. After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products
B. The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period
C. Improvements in manufacturing processes enable drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze.
D. In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions
E. After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia.

I cannot get my head round the reasonings of the OA. No matter how I look at it, D seems the best answer. If D is true, wouldn’t per capita expenditure of drugs increase?

Can anyone explain why option A is correct?
Argument says
In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products’ prices
A says:
drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products
So the new medications should also be governed by the same rule.

Yes, but since these medications will be new, they can be priced at whatever price the company wants. There will be no reference price to stick to.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nazim391
The way MGMAT explains the reasoning, I am afraid is also shaky.

"After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products.
--> by developing new patented drugs (which are usually more expensive -- assumption), and if the population finds the new drugs useful (another assumption), yes the per capita expenditure of medication will increase".

How come we can come up assumption (which is a new information) in inference question?

Could experts explain, please?

Thanks,
Nazim


New medication does not have a reference price. The manufacturers are focusing on creating new medication to replace the old one. If the per capita expenditure is increasing, then obviously the new medication would be higher priced. The new medication is REPLACING the old one. So the patients taking the old medication will need to switch to new medication. Option (A) certainly fills in the gap very well.
Also, it is not an inference question. It is resolve the paradox. The correct option in this question type will give you new information that will help you resolve the two sides.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma gmat1393 GMATNinja nightblade354

Isn't it right to think that a population increase could cause inflation? Wouldn't inflation further lead to more expenses? and wouldn't that lead to an increased per capita expenditure on products?

Quote:
(B) The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period.

That is what I comprehended from option B, and I thought it was fairly straightforward!

No Arguments about A though.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 16,040
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 472
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,040
Kudos: 73,632
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sharathnair14
VeritasKarishma gmat1393 GMATNinja nightblade354

Isn't it right to think that a population increase could cause inflation? Wouldn't inflation further lead to more expenses? and wouldn't that lead to an increased per capita expenditure on products?

Quote:
(B) The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period.

That is what I comprehended from option B, and I thought it was fairly straightforward!

No Arguments about A though.

Population increase may cause inflation or it may not. If the Govt tweaks monetary policies to ensure no inflation, then it is not necessary to see inflation. In either case, we know that the prices of drugs are frozen. Price increase is banned - inflation or no inflation in the rest of the economy. The pharma sector should not see any inflation. No matter how much the demand will rise, the Govt is not allowing the sector to raise prices.
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7324 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts