In January of last year, Fastfood King started using a new lowfat oil

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

This argument concerns the impact of the change in cooking oil used by Fastfood King, and whether or not this change had an adverse impact on sales. It is given that sales of Fast Fries increased by 10 percent subsequent to the change. The issue is whether or not this 10 percent increase compares favorably to the increase one would expect taking other factors into account, including in particular the percentage increase enjoyed by Fastfood King’s other offerings.

A. CORRECT. This statement indicates that Fastfood King’s total food sales increased by less than 10 percent. As the sales of Fast Fries increased at a higher rate of 10 percent, this strongly suggests that the change to lowfat oil did not adversely impact the sales of Fast Fries.

B. The profit margins of different Fastfood King offerings are not relevant to the argument.

C. Any preference for the taste of corn oil over the new lowfat oil would damage, not support, the conclusion that the change has not negatively impacted the sales of Fast Fries.

D. The fact that Fastfood King was visited by 20 percent more people last year suggests that consumption of Fast Fries, which increased by only 10 percent, may have been adversely affected by the change. This would weaken the conclusion, not strengthen it.

E. That the sales of Fast Fries increased by 20 percent in the previous year suggests that the rate of increase was slowed last year, possibly as a result of the cooking oil change. This would weaken the conclusion that the change did not have any negative impact on sales, rather than strengthen it.