Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 May 2017, 06:58

### 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

# Events & Promotions

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

# I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer:

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2010
Posts: 9
Location: USA
WE 1: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2010, 13:55
gautrang wrote:
I found this one, it is pretty good in a way.

Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline in rentals was probably due almost entirely to the February 1994 opening of Videorama, the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply.

Brad: There must be another explanation: as you yourself said, the decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals. Yet Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the force of the objection that Brad presents to Jennifer's explanation?

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week.
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater.
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends.

Tricky question. I would go with E.

_________________

KUDOS if it helped!!
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not" - Thomas Jefferson
"You don't know the limits if you haven't crossed it"

Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2010
Posts: 9
Location: USA
WE 1: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2010, 14:26
Choice E. See my explanation below.
Jennifer’s conclusion: Somehow the sale of videos has caused the reduction in total rentals for the year 1994.
Brad’s objection: They only sold 4000 not 10000. So there has to be another reason for the drop in rentals (not the sale of videos)
Critical point: Brad is objection to the point that Jennifer made (the new store has started selling videos, something that has never happened in 1993). Choice E weakens Brad’s claim by saying that “selling videos has led to owner loaning them to friends”. So there is not “other” reason like Brad is saying.

Hope this helps!!! KUDOSif it did.
_________________

KUDOS if it helped!!
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not" - Thomas Jefferson
"You don't know the limits if you haven't crossed it"

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 364
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 213 [0], given: 87

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2011, 01:56
vicksikand wrote:
People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends
How does E account for the change in sales from '93 to '94?
E doesn't say that the people started lending after '93, they may very be lending videos to friends in '93.
Frequently loan them to friends - in no way account for the 6000 deficit.

Brad's objection is that Videorama cannot be singly held accountable for the loss of sales, hence there must be an alternate reason for this. Choice E provides that alternate reason and in a way lends force to what Brad is saying. Choice E in no way weakens Brad's objection.

I wouldnt agree with choice A either.
(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold. Videorama sold 4000,and rented say (4001) what happened to the other 1999 videos?

How is choice E weaking . I agree with vicksikand. Brad says that there must be some other reason and not due to openine og Videorama. Doesnt choice E seem to stregthen the conclusion by supporting brad's point that the decline is not due to opening of videorama but people who own videos frequently loan them to their friends ....

I am confused.... Please explain ....!!!????
Manager
Status: Target MBA
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 203
Location: Singapore
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2011, 06:46
gautrang wrote:
I found this one, it is pretty good in a way.

Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline in rentals was probably due almost entirely to the February 1994 opening of Videorama, the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply.

Brad: There must be another explanation: as you yourself said, the decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals. Yet Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the force of the objection that Brad presents to Jennifer's explanation?

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week.
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater.
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends.

# of Videos rented in 1993 - # of Videos rented in 1994 = 10000
Videos sold in 1994 = 4000
Remaining 10000 - 4000 = 6000
6000 must be compensated in some way
Option E says videos owned by users, who probably bought 4000 videos from VideoRama, were lent, probably 6000.
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
GM.

Director
Joined: 28 Jun 2011
Posts: 890
Followers: 92

Kudos [?]: 232 [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2011, 14:13
Manager
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 230
Location: Arkansas, US
WE 1: 2.5 yrs in manufacturing
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 18

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2011, 20:27
gautrang wrote:
I found this one, it is pretty good in a way.

Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline in rentals was probably due almost entirely to the February 1994 opening of Videorama, the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply.

Brad: There must be another explanation: as you yourself said, the decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals. Yet Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the force of the objection that Brad presents to Jennifer's explanation?

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week.
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater.
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends.

I still dont get it.

Brad says that IT IS NOT VIDEORAMA'S FAULT.
To weaken Brad's objection, we need to prove that it is Videorama's fault.

Am i wrong in understanding the question?
Would appreciate any explanation.
_________________

ARISE AWAKE AND REST NOT UNTIL THE GOAL IS ACHIEVED

Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 25
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2011, 18:49
I would go with Choice E since it gives an alternate reason to weaken Brad's statement.
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 146
GMAT Date: 10-21-2011
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 15

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2011, 22:49
** thanks for this!

TehJay wrote:
gautrang wrote:
I found this one, it is pretty good in a way.

Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline in rentals was probably due almost entirely to the February 1994 opening of Videorama, the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply.

Brad: There must be another explanation: as you yourself said, the decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals. Yet Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the force of the objection that Brad presents to Jennifer's explanation?

Jennifer claims that video rentals in Centerville decreased by 10,000 in 1994, and blames the opening of Videorama for this decrease, because Videorama sells videos cheaply. In other words, she's stating that everyone who would be renting videos is instead buying them from Videorama. Brad disagrees, citing the fact that Videorama only sold 4,000 videos in 1994. So even if every one of those 4,000 sales was replaced by a rental, the total amount of rentals still would have gone down by 6,000. What would weaken this argument?

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold. It doesn't matter how many videos Videorama specifically rented, because the total number of rentals still decreased by 10,000.
(B) In 1994 two new outlets that rent but that do not sell videos opened in Centerville. Again, doesn't matter - Jennifer is discussing the TOTAL number of rentals in Centerville by EVERY store. So even if these stores opened, their figures are included in her argument.
(C) Most of the video rental outlets in Centerville rent videos at a discount on certain nights of the week. Irrelevant
(D) People often buy videos of movies that they have previously seen in a theater. Irrelevant
(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends. Correct. Videorama may have only sold 4,000 videos, but those videos could have been loaned out to people who would have instead rented the movie, thereby decreasing the total number of rentals.

_________________

"The best day of your life is the one on which you decide your life is your own. No apologies or excuses. No one to lean on, rely on, or blame. The gift is yours - it is an amazing journey - and you alone are responsible for the quality of it. This is the day your life really begins." - Bob Moawab

Current Student
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 45
Schools: Foster '17 (A)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 25

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2011, 11:26
hey..

The arguement compares rentals - that were less in 1994 than 1993.. with sale of videos by videorama..

so why not bridge the gap why saying videorama rented more than it sold ? - a?
similarly why not b ?
Director
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 692
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 176 [0], given: 37

### Show Tags

01 Nov 2011, 00:26
+1 for E.

Crick
Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2010
Posts: 188
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 141

### Show Tags

01 Nov 2011, 11:11
E
_________________

-------------------------------------

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7372
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2285

Kudos [?]: 15094 [0], given: 224

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2011, 02:41
Priyanka2011 wrote:
hey..

The arguement compares rentals - that were less in 1994 than 1993.. with sale of videos by videorama..

so why not bridge the gap why saying videorama rented more than it sold ? - a?
similarly why not b ?

Responding to a pm:

The following is the gist of the argument:

Jennifer: Video rental outlets handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline was due to opening of Videorama in 1994 that sold videos cheaply.

Brad: Wrong. The decline was 10,000 rentals but Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Question: Which would most seriously weaken Brad's objection?

We have to weaken Brad's objection that Videorama sold only 4000 videos whereas the decline is 10,000 videos.
What can explain that 4000 videos sold by Videorama are responsible for the decline of 10,000 in rentals? 4000 videos sold should be responsible for decline of about 4000 rentals only. But if people lend their videos to family and friends, each video sold could account for 2-3 fewer rentals. Then it is possible that 10,000 fewer people rent the videos. Therefore, (E) weakens Brad's objection and is our answer.

(A) and (B) do not provide an explanation against Brad's objection and hence are not correct.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Manager Joined: 29 Jun 2011 Posts: 161 WE 1: Information Technology(Retail) Followers: 3 Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 29 Re: Jennifer Video rental [#permalink] ### Show Tags 03 Nov 2011, 03:30 I chose A first but its clear now why the answer is E. Manager Joined: 08 Aug 2011 Posts: 199 GPA: 3.5 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 51 Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink] ### Show Tags 06 Jan 2012, 22:52 I went with A but the explanation is good for why it is E. Manager Status: folding sleeves up Joined: 26 Apr 2013 Posts: 156 Location: India Concentration: Finance, Strategy GMAT 1: 530 Q39 V23 GMAT 2: 560 Q42 V26 GPA: 3.5 WE: Consulting (Computer Hardware) Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 39 Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink] ### Show Tags 30 Jan 2014, 12:26 Why E? Does that mean one gives the purchased video in month of February to his friends? or does it mean that max videos were purchased in feb month and that they were only shared with friends in feb? Am I missing something with this logic? Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 7372 Location: Pune, India Followers: 2285 Kudos [?]: 15094 [0], given: 224 Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink] ### Show Tags 30 Jan 2014, 20:49 email2vm wrote: Why E? Does that mean one gives the purchased video in month of February to his friends? or does it mean that max videos were purchased in feb month and that they were only shared with friends in feb? Am I missing something with this logic? Brad says that 10,000 fewer videos were rented but the cheap sale of video rentals by Videorama cannot be responsible for this entire decline because they sold only 4000 videos. So out of these 10,000, it makes sense that 4000 people did not rent the video because they bought them instead but what about the other 6000? Why did they not rent the videos too? So Brad insists that there must be another reason too. The explanation to Brad's comment can be that the people who buy videos, loan them out to their friends. So every video sold will decreases the number of rentals by not just one but more than one. Hence the entire 10,000 can be explained by the 4000 videos sold. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 355
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 126 [0], given: 70

Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2014, 07:12
Jennifer: Video rental outlets in Centerville together handled 10,000 fewer video rentals in 1994 than in 1993. The decline in rentals was probably due almost entirely to the February 1994 opening of Videorama, the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply.

Brad: There must be another explanation: as you yourself said, the decline was on the order of 10,000 rentals. Yet Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the force of the objection that Brad presents to Jennifer's explanation?

(A) In 1994 Videorama rented out more videos than it sold.......A may not weaken the Brad argument--------Videorama sold only 4,000 videos in 1994...say it rented out 4500 videos....total 8500.... but 10,000 fewer videos were rented out in the city.....HENCE NO LINKAGE TO THIS ARGUMENT... INCORRECT

(E) People who own videos frequently loan them to their friends.....4000 VIDEOS BOUGHT... SAY EACH OWNER LOANS THEM TO 2 FRIENDS..... TOTAL PEOPLE WHO WATCHED THE VIDEO(INCLUDING THE OWNER) ---12000......HENCE POSSIBLE THAT ...10,000 fewer videos were rented out in the city. CORRECT....

Manager
Joined: 30 May 2013
Posts: 188
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GPA: 3.82
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 72

Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2014, 07:20
I initiallly opted A). My mistake id that i didnt read the question fully and understand. " the first and only video rental outlet in the area that, in addition to renting videos, also sold them cheaply." I didnt take it on the first read.

So on seeing E) tought its irrevalant as J is saying nothing about selling only B is saying about selling which is irrevalant to the answer.

So opted A) probably weakens the answer.

Lesson learn t: Always read the question fully and thoroughly.

Regards,
Rrsnathan.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10371
Followers: 997

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 0

Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2015, 10:52
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Current Student
Status: GMAT Date: 10/08/15
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 95
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Human Resources, Strategy
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V35
GPA: 3.5
WE: Human Resources (Consumer Products)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 62

Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer: [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2015, 05:25
Can one of the experts please share their views on this question.

Since A is the OA - there is no point arguing - but I am not clear on whay not E? It is aperfectly good option and logically completes what the question asks for.

Thanks,
aimtoteach
_________________

Thanks,
aimtoteach

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please give Kudos if you find this post useful.

Re: I found this one, it is pretty good in a way. Jennifer:   [#permalink] 22 Apr 2015, 05:25

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 44 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
6 Scientists studying climate change have found that one of 7 23 Apr 2017, 04:00
One way to judge the performance of a company is to compare 0 08 Nov 2012, 02:12
4 Try this....good one 6 09 Dec 2015, 07:27
2 Does anyone know of any good ways of mastering the CR. I 13 09 Apr 2014, 22:57
3 I got this one right, but took me 3min. This is a good one. 19 04 Mar 2015, 05:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by