Last visit was: 20 Jul 2024, 08:15 It is currently 20 Jul 2024, 08:15
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Given that, recently, the founders of startup company Zeddifreddo have

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642503 [5]
Given Kudos: 86706
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2024
Posts: 75
Own Kudos [?]: 91 [2]
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2020
Posts: 112
Own Kudos [?]: 114 [2]
Given Kudos: 102
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
635 Q84 V83 DI77
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
GPA: 7
Intern
Joined: 13 Nov 2022
Posts: 48
Own Kudos [?]: 40 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Technology
GPA: 3.3
Re: Given that, recently, the founders of startup company Zeddifreddo have [#permalink]
1
Kudos
IMO A

The argument discusses the reasoning and assumptions behind the interest of potential acquirers in the startup company Zeddifreddo following another company's advanced acquisition discussions. To analyze the roles of the boldfaced portions, let's break down the argument and the specific roles each boldfaced statement plays:

The first boldfaced statement ("other potential acquirers of the company, who had suspected that Zeddifreddo's business performance was mostly hype and not a product of sound financials, have taken interest in making their own acquisition offers") describes the actions and thoughts of other potential acquirers based on their observation of the ongoing acquisition talks. This serves as a situational backdrop or evidence that triggers the subsequent analysis and conclusions in the argument.

The second boldfaced statement ("potential acquirers of a startup have been known to overlook that company's financial soundness and favor the acquisition on other grounds, however ill-advised such a position may be") provides a reason to question the assumption or conclusion that other potential acquirers might be making based on the advanced stage of the acquisition talks. It suggests that just because the talks are in an advanced stage, it doesn't necessarily confirm the financial soundness of Zeddifreddo, as acquirers might have other motivations.

Given these roles:

The first statement serves as evidence that has led other potential acquirers to draw a conclusion (that the ongoing talks suggest financial soundness).
The second statement challenges the validity of this conclusion by suggesting that acquirers sometimes prioritize other factors over financial soundness.
Therefore, the correct choice is: A. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
Intern
Joined: 26 Nov 2023
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [0]
Given Kudos: 88
Re: Given that, recently, the founders of startup company Zeddifreddo have [#permalink]
The intermediate conclusion is not the arguments' conclusion, it the conclusion from the other investors. Could that be taken as intermediate conclusion?
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94430
Own Kudos [?]: 642503 [0]
Given Kudos: 86706
Re: Given that, recently, the founders of startup company Zeddifreddo have [#permalink]
Bunuel wrote:
Given that, recently, the founders of startup company Zeddifreddo have confirmed that they are in the late stages of discussion of an acquisition offer from another company, other potential acquirers of the company, who had suspected that Zeddifreddo's business performance was mostly hype and not a product of sound financials, have taken interest in making their own acquisition offers. They figure that, if Zeddifreddo's current potential acquirer has reached late stages of an acquisition discussion without having withdrawn its bid, that the acquirer must have had a chance to audit Zeddifreddo's financial position and has found it to be sound. Such reasoning might be hasty, however, since potential acquirers of a startup have been known to overlook that company's financial soundness and favor the acquisition on other grounds, however ill-advised such a position may be.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The ﬁrst describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

B. The ﬁrst describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

C. The ﬁrst provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

D. The ﬁrst describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

E. The ﬁrst describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
­

­

Official Explanation

Reading the question: we're in boldfaced territory, so we confirm from the question that our task here is to identify the logical roles played by the various sentences in the prompt.

Sentence

Starts With.../Includes...

Function

1st

"Given that the founders...have confirmed"

Supports view of other potential acquirers

1st

View of other potential acquirers

2nd

"they figure that..."

Supports view of other potential acquirers

3rd

"Such reasoning might be hasty, however,"

Contrary view

3rd

"since potential acquirers...have been known"

Supports contrary view

Creating a filter: opinion-charged words help parse the prompt into two views. Boldfaced portion #1 supports opinion #1, and boldfaced #2 supports opinion #2, which is a contrary opinion.

Applying the filter: (B) and (C) call sentence #2 a conclusion, so they are out. Choice (D) is out; the argument as a whole is not seeking to explain the fact that Zeddifreddo is in the late states of the acquisition, but rather what the late stage says about its financials. (E) is out for the same reason. We go back to confirm (A). The first sentence has indeed been taken as support that the company has sound financials, and the second sentence gives a reason to question it.