Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000

Logic for eliminating A?

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma Sajjad1994

I can assume Videorama Rented out some 7k videos and hence affected centerville Business, I chose E But how do i eliminate such trap answer which actually sounds perfectly logical if option E did not Exist

Option (A) is not correct.
You missed out on the first line of the argument: "Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993."
The number includes the videos rented out by Videorama too. All outlets together rented fewer videos this year. So even if VIdeorama rented out 7000 videos, it is included in the total which is 10,000 lower than 1993 total.

But nowhere in the argument is it stated that lending is a new phenomenon. It may have led to say a %age decrease in the past too, which had well been taken care of in the base figure itself.

Is the conclusion: Videorama responsible for the deficit or videorama selling videos responsible for the deficit?

Gagan

J's P1: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. (Inference: Video rentals rent out videos and do not sell them and they've had bad business in 1994)
J's P2: Videorama opened in 1994 and both sells and rents videos
C: The decline was because of the opening of Videorama

B's P1: The decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals and Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.
B's C: There was some other reason

Task: We need to weaken Brads argument and strengthen Jennifers

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold. - Tempting but does it truly explain why the rentals have gone down? They've mentioned that Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 and based on the argument we need to include the videorama's rentals in this number. So, we can eliminate.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville. - But rentals on a overall, have reduced so the opening of competitors does not change anything and does not strength Jennifers argument.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week. - eliminate, not relevant
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater. - okay so? eliminate
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends. -Since videorama sells CDs now at low prices, people are tempted to buy instead of rent. After buying the CDs, they frequently rent out to their friends. This makes sense. Before 1993, people would rent from the stores, watch the videos and return them. this didn't allow them to loan the videos to their friends because 1. there usually is a time frame attached to the rental 2. everyone has an access to rent movies.

I believe many people mark option A because they miss understanding that when the passage says "Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993," Video rental outlets also include Videorama since Videorama is also located in Centerville.

Thus, even if I change option A to say

In 1994 Videorama rented out 6000 more videos than it sold.

Option A would still be wrong.

Understanding the argument - Video rental outlets handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. And the reason they gave is that Videorama, in addition to renting, also sold them cheaply.
Brad counters and points to 4000 sold and points to an alternate cause of decline. And we need to challenge and show that in fact the cheap sales somehow led to 10,000 fewer rentals.

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold. - Say it rented out 4001 videos and that doesn't add to 10,000. But if it's 6,000 then it's ok. So may or may not weaken. We don't know. Out.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville. - out of scope. Our scope is limited to examining the connection between video rental outlets selling 10,000 fewer and cheap sales by Videorama.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week. - out of scope.
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater. - out of scope
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends. - Exactly. It shows the ripple effect.

How can C be correct? I do understand that people can loan the videos to their friends, but this nature might have been present before Videorama came into the market.

please check it out; if wrong, let me know.
The reason why A is wrong:

if we use "rented out more videos than it sold", it means that the number of rented videos can be, say, 4001 or 100000. The latter case will inevitably weaken the argument because of [100000(rented)+4000(sold)], which shows the possibility but in the other case of 4001, it will not do so since the number equals 8001 < 10000(total decline) = 4001(rented)+4000(sold).

­Choice (E) specifically states that "People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends." It doesn't say anything about people who have RENTED videos.

Also, if you own a video, you can loan it to as many friends as you want for as long as you want. A video rental is only for a limited time, which hampers your ability to loan a rented video to friends.

Sure, maybe some people were sharing rented videos before Videorama existed. But if people can now buy videos cheaply and if people who OWN videos frequently loan them to friends, there will be a lot of people who no longer need to rent videos -- they can just borrow from the friends who bought the cheap videos. 

And remember, you aren't looking for a choice that DISPROVES Brad's point. You're looking for the choice that would most seriously weaken the force of Brad's objection, and (E) is by far the BEST option of the ones we're given.

I hope that helps!­

­Taking it one step further: it doesn't actually matter whether (A) is true.

Maybe Videorama only rented 1,000 videos. But who cares? All that matters is that videorama SOLD 4000 and that video rental outlets in Centerville TOGETHER handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The actual number of rentals by Videorama doesn't affect Jennifer's argument or Brad's objection, so (A) has to go.­

I hope that helps a bit!