Last visit was: 01 May 2026, 19:31

It is currently 01 May 2026, 19:31

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Back to Forum

Create Topic

In North America there has been an explosion of public interest in, an

1 2

kornn

Joined: 28 Jan 2017

Last visit: 18 Dec 2021

Posts: 356

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 832

Posts: 356

Kudos: 96

Updated on: 13 Jan 2020, 01:28

Originally posted by kornn on 12 Jan 2020, 03:24.
Last edited by kornn on 13 Jan 2020, 01:28, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos

Bookmarks

VeritasKarishma

mindsprout

VeritasPrepKarishma

I read your post
The reason below why I do not find A as the correct answer

Here we are talking about only the currently 'active' 70 professional opera companies, so the companies which are inactive or closed are not the set we are discussing in the question, we can say that if 45 are active now in last 30 years (which remained active after 50 were closed and 95 in total were founded) can still show that there is an explosion in interest because we don't know how many companies failed before 30 years to keep the 25 companies active (70 = 45 + 25), probably there were 200 companies founded before 30 years and only 25 remained active, because people weren't that interested and hence now there is an explosion of interest because approx. 50% of the companies founded in last 30 decades remained active and survived, as compared to the 12.5% of companies that remained active before 30 decades (here 12.5% means 25 out of 200 and approx. 50% means 45 out of 95)

My post tells you that the answer is (B), not (A). I am assuming it is a typo in your post above.

The probability of a place succeeding depends on many many factors - location, policies, management, quality of product, service etc.
Continuing with the example of a pizza parlor, it may shut down because the recipe of the sauce is not good - pizza might still be very popular. So survival rate is not a measure of popularity of a product. But number of outlets surviving are. If last year, there were 100 pizza outlets surviving in a city and this year there are 200 surviving then we can say that pizza is more popular now than before.

Dear VeritasKarishma,

Q1. I know that the post above is 4 years old now. However, if you could remember, could you please explain more on the highlighted portion above?

For example, let's say over the course of the last 30 years 1000 were founded. According to the passage, 45 are still survive. The survival rate is 4.5% Here, why don't we really care about the survival rate, i.e. the total 1000 founded?

Q2. From the passage, does it mean that 70 - 45 = 25 currently active companies were founded MORE THAN 30 years ago?
(and since we do not know how many companies existed more than 30 years ago, we cannot calculate SURVIVAL RATE for the concerned batch?)

Thank you as always

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Last visit: 29 Apr 2026

Posts: 16,448

Own Kudos:

79,469

Given Kudos: 485

Location: Pune, India

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 16,448

Kudos: 79,469

12 Jan 2020, 23:23

Kudos

Bookmarks

varotkorn

VeritasKarishma

mindsprout

Dear VeritasKarishma,

Q1. I know that the post above is 4 years old now. However, if you could remember, could you please explain more on the highlighted portion above?

For example, let's say over the course of the last 30 years 1000 were founded. According to the passage, 45 are still survive. The survival rate is 4.5% Here, why don't we really care about the survival rate, i.e. the total 1000 founded?

Q2. From the passage, does it mean that 70 - 45 = 15 currently active companies were founded MORE THAN 30 years ago?
(and since we do not know how many companies existed more than 30 years ago, we cannot calculate SURVIVAL RATE for the concerned batch?)

Thank you as always

Last year, 50 new pizza outlets opened in my neighbourhood but only 20% survived (so only 10 new places survived). Can I say that pizza is no longer popular in my area? No. What if 100 new pizza places have opened up now?
Perhaps pizza is very popular but the outlets closed down because they were not maintaining good quality or hygiene etc. We need to keep in mind how many new places are coming up. What if 2 new places are coming up in place of every one that is shut down? We cannot say then that the product is not popular.

The passage tells us that of the 70 active companies, 45 were founded in the last 30 years. So 25 were founded more than 30 years ago. But that doesn't concern us. We should think about what happened in the last 30 years (because our conclusion says that public interest has increased in the last 3 decades). If in the last 3 decades only 10 previous companies shut down but 45 were founded, we can say that interest has increased. But if in the last 3 decades 100 previous companies were shut down but 45 were founded, then the interest seems to have decreased.

kornn

Joined: 28 Jan 2017

Last visit: 18 Dec 2021

Posts: 356

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 832

Posts: 356

Kudos: 96

13 Jan 2020, 00:22

Kudos

Bookmarks

VeritasKarishma

Dear VeritasKarishma,

Thank you for your reply

I have one follow-up question.

According to the highlighted portion above, I suppose that "previous companies" mean the same thing as companies that had been active 30 years ago in the correct answer.

My questions are:
Q1. Does companies that had been active 30 years ago mean the companies that were founded MORE than 30 years ago?
Q2. Are the 25 companies according to the passage also in this category?

Thank you as always Ma'am

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Last visit: 29 Apr 2026

Posts: 16,448

Own Kudos:

79,469

[1]

Given Kudos: 485

Location: Pune, India

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 16,448

Kudos: 79,469

[1]

13 Jan 2020, 21:38

Kudos

Bookmarks

varotkorn

VeritasKarishma

Dear VeritasKarishma,

Thank you for your reply

Yes, previous companies means those that were founded more than 30 years ago and were active 30 years ago.
Yes, the 25 companies were founded more than 30 years ago and are still active.

Ayushi2000

Joined: 11 Jan 2025

Last visit: 26 Apr 2026

Posts: 37

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 42

Location: India

Schools: CBS '26 (D) Wharton '26 (D) Kellogg '26 (D)

GPA: 9.054

Schools: CBS '26 (D) Wharton '26 (D) Kellogg '26 (D)

Posts: 37

Kudos: 4

03 Mar 2025, 14:33

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi,
So by basically considering the negation of option B, we are creating an additional situation along with the evidence provided right? And then using logic, we say is the evidence holding true (i.e. supporting the argument) or not now? Because of the additional situation, the evidence can no longer support the statement, and the argument becomes opposite.
I want to confirm if my approach of thinking is correct, thank you!

KarishmaB

imhimanshu

In North America there has been an explosion of public interest in, and enjoyment of,opera over the last three decades. The evidence of this explosion is that of the 70 or so professional opera companies currently active in North America,45 were founded over the course of the last 30 years.

The reasoning above assumes which one of the following?

a) All of the 70 professional opera companies are commercially viable options.

b) There were fewer than 45 professional opera companies that had been active 30 years ago and that ceased operations during the last 30 years.

c) There has not been a corresponding increase in the number of professional companies devoted to other performing arts.

d) The size of the average audience at performances by professional opera companies has increased over the past three decades.

e) The 45 most recently founded companies were all established as a result of enthusiasm on the part of a potential audience.

Can someone provide a reasoning over choice E

You have to focus on the conclusion.
Conclusion: Over the last 30 years, there has been an explosion of interest in Opera.

What does that mean? It means that the interest has increased manifold in the last 30 yrs (focus on the word 'increased')

How does the author support his argument? By saying that out of the current 70 opera companies, 45 were founded in the last 30 yrs i.e. much more than half were found in the last 30 yrs.
What is the assumption? 50 opera companies did not shut shop in the last 30 yrs i.e. more than 45 companies did not close down. You need your assumption to be true for the conclusion to be true. If 50 companies had shut down in the past 30 yrs, we can't say that opera is gaining a following.

Think about it: You say, "Popularity of pizza is increasing every day. Every week, one new pizza place opens up in my neighborhood."
What is your assumption? That 2 pizza places do not shut down everyday in your neighborhood. It that were the case, then we cannot say that pizza is becoming more popular.

You don't need option (E) to be true for the conclusion to be true. Say, even if all 45 were not established as a result of enthusiasm (say, only 40 were established as a result of enthusiasm), even then it is possible that interest in opera has increased. You don't need (E) to be true to prove the conclusion. Hence it is not an assumption.