It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 13:22

### 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

# In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 459

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 4

In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2010, 20:04
14
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (01:00) correct 49% (01:08) wrong based on 580 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

-Underline your question. It takes only a few seconds!
-Search before you post.

Kudos [?]: 218 [0], given: 4

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 364

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 22

Schools: LBS, INSEAD, IMD, ISB - Anything with just 1 yr program.
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Mar 2010, 20:52
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries. - more money, relatively speaking, not discussed in the stimulus.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts. - goes hand-in-hand with the statement - "waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front."
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase. - we don't know about this, we only know that it is industrial and commercial space.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives. - tax incentives are not discussed, careful not to assume.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront. - weakens actually, if interior spaces are more expensive, real estate developers won't be looking at waterfront properties.

_________________

I am AWESOME and it's gonna be LEGENDARY!!!

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 22

VP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1476

Kudos [?]: 756 [0], given: 6

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2010, 08:09
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
my pick is (B)

In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

a)People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
>>> This does not effect property developers profit

b)Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
>>> Since homeowners are willing to spend large sums on residential properties in industrial district, it is likely that developers will make profits by making buildings on those properties because as per the premise waterfront properties were taken by industry and commerce

c)Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
>>> This does not effect property developers profit

d)Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
>>> Tax incentives are no where mentioned in premise

e)Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
>>> out of scope

Kudos [?]: 756 [0], given: 6

Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 99

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 0

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2010, 11:38
My take is C. What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 417

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2010, 21:31
OA is B, it is from OG, if i am not mistaken...
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127

Kudos [?]: 3478 [1], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2013, 00:02
1
KUDOS
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.

KEY is: the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce ==> New residential buildings should be built on the waterfront that used to be industry and commerce districts.

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
Wrong. Out of scope.

2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
Correct. A developer can make profit ONLY IF customers are willing to pay for properties used to be industrial or commercial districts. If Customers are not willing to pay, a developer's plan will fail.

3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
Wrong. Shell game. What if there are many available lots but nobody wants to buy?

4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
Wrong. Out of scope.

5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
Wrong. Out of scope

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3478 [1], given: 123

Manager
Joined: 22 Jan 2013
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 28

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2013, 01:25
pqhai wrote:
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.

KEY is: the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce ==> New residential buildings should be built on the waterfront that used to be industry and commerce districts.

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
Wrong. Out of scope.

2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
Correct. A developer can make profit ONLY IF customers are willing to pay for properties used to be industrial or commercial districts. If Customers are not willing to pay, a developer's plan will fail.

3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
Wrong. Shell game. What if there are many available lots but nobody wants to buy?

4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
Wrong. Out of scope.

5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
Wrong. Out of scope

Hope it helps.

The conclusion is :A developer who wishes to make a large profit invests in waterfront.

So our strengthening argument must be supporting this statement. My pick is D.

It is telling that the agents will make more money out of the deal'
as far the B is concerned : it is just restating the premise :Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front.

and please post the OA and OE.

If you learnt anything from my post, Press KUDOS
After all, KUDOS is a great way to encourage the complete community.

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 28

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1978

Kudos [?]: 719 [0], given: 355

Concentration: Finance
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2013, 12:46
pqhai wrote:
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.

KEY is: the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce ==> New residential buildings should be built on the waterfront that used to be industry and commerce districts.

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
Wrong. Out of scope.

2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
Correct. A developer can make profit ONLY IF customers are willing to pay for properties used to be industrial or commercial districts. If Customers are not willing to pay, a developer's plan will fail.

3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
Wrong. Shell game. What if there are many available lots but nobody wants to buy?

4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
Wrong. Out of scope.

5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
Wrong. Out of scope

Hope it helps.

You know... I picked B first but then I thought how they talked about making a large profit as a conclusion based on the evidence that large sums were being paid, so I thought that we needed to find an option that would not make costs increase or at least be stable so that we could conclude that, so the only option that seemed to fit was D....

I've seen the Revenues-Profit trick a couple of times, I its pretty common on CR passages especially 700-800

Cheers

Kudos [?]: 719 [0], given: 355

Intern
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
Posts: 6

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

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2013, 01:28
Hi, This tread is awesome for me....Thanks...

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

Intern
Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Posts: 25

Kudos [?]: 22 [1], given: 22

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2014, 17:36
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
I'm still not convinced between B and D and from the above posts, I'm not alone in this respect. I learned CR based off PowerScore, so this is a 'Strengthen' question, right? Thus, the answer choices are assumed so it doesn't matter that tax incentives aren't mentioned in the passage. We simply need to identify an answer that strengthens the conclusion, which is: A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

I can see how B is correct, but I already see this mentioned in the passage. IE, "as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front." So, since large sums have been paid, they were clearly willing to pay the large sums (unless they were forced).

In terms of D, tax incentives lead to a higher profit, which strengthens the argument in my opinion.
_________________

Please +1 KUDOS if my post helps. Thank you.

Kudos [?]: 22 [1], given: 22

Intern
Joined: 30 Oct 2014
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 9

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Nov 2014, 03:32
I agree with B not being the best answer. Since this question is not from OG, I am just gonna categorize it as a badly design question...

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 9

Manager
Status: Manager
Affiliations: Manager
Joined: 06 Nov 2012
Posts: 168

Kudos [?]: 90 [1], given: 111

Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
Schools: Boston U '19 (D)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q49 V33
GPA: 3
WE: Supply Chain Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Nov 2014, 06:08
1
KUDOS
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

Conc.: To make large profits, a developer should buy WF (earlier for industrial and commerce use) and erect RB on them.
Few assumptions can be:
1. If no such WFs are available for purchase or
2. WFs are available but no purchaser or
3. Purchaser/developer is available but no buyer of build residential properties or
4. Buyers are available but they are not willing to buy RB on earlier used-to-be-industrial/commercial places.

A] People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries - OFS
B] Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts - Correct. Buyers are available and they are willing to spend on erstwhile ind./comm. properties
C] Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase - Go with one of assumptions but Option B is more strong as what if lots are available for purchase but no buyer is available ? Hence wrong.
D] Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives - Question talks about profits. What if developer erect property because of great tax-incentive but could not find any buyer for this property ? He will suffer losses.
E] Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront - OFS

Give Kudo if you find my explanation useful......
_________________

Hard-work, Perseverance and Commitment.....

Kudos [?]: 90 [1], given: 111

Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2012
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 27

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 660 Q51 V28
GMAT 3: 740 Q49 V41
GPA: 3.55
WE: Engineering (Entertainment and Sports)
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2015, 00:36
dinesh86 wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

Conc.: To make large profits, a developer should buy WF (earlier for industrial and commerce use) and erect RB on them.
Few assumptions can be:
1. If no such WFs are available for purchase or
2. WFs are available but no purchaser or
3. Purchaser/developer is available but no buyer of build residential properties or
4. Buyers are available but they are not willing to buy RB on earlier used-to-be-industrial/commercial places.

A] People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries - OFS
B] Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts - Correct. Buyers are available and they are willing to spend on erstwhile ind./comm. properties
C] Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase - Go with one of assumptions but Option B is more strong as what if lots are available for purchase but no buyer is available ? Hence wrong.
D] Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives - Question talks about profits. What if developer erect property because of great tax-incentive but could not find any buyer for this property ? He will suffer losses.
E] Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront - OFS

Give Kudo if you find my explanation useful......

Hi Dinesh

As you explained in the option D, if buyers are not available for beach properties but as the argument clearly stated that these days people are paying large sums for beach properties. So this is evident from the passage and this option can also have fair chance of winning.

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 27

Intern
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 35

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 204

GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V35
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2015, 22:03
bekerman wrote:
I'm still not convinced between B and D and from the above posts, I'm not alone in this respect. I learned CR based off PowerScore, so this is a 'Strengthen' question, right? Thus, the answer choices are assumed so it doesn't matter that tax incentives aren't mentioned in the passage. We simply need to identify an answer that strengthens the conclusion, which is: A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

I can see how B is correct, but I already see this mentioned in the passage. IE, "as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front." So, since large sums have been paid, they were clearly willing to pay the large sums (unless they were forced).

In terms of D, tax incentives lead to a higher profit, which strengthens the argument in my opinion.

Exactly! B) looked obvious from the question stem : since people were ready to pay large sums, they were clearly willing to buy it!

Experts , explanation needed ! mikemcgarry, can you help us here?

Also can anyone explain why is E) wrong?
If the developer wants large profit and people are ready to pay huge sums then its important that the plots cost him less as well right? Isn't that the gap in the argument?

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 204

Manager
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 20

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Nov 2015, 08:01
pqhai wrote:
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.

KEY is: the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce ==> New residential buildings should be built on the waterfront that used to be industry and commerce districts.

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
Wrong. Out of scope.

2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
Correct. A developer can make profit ONLY IF customers are willing to pay for properties used to be industrial or commercial districts. If Customers are not willing to pay, a developer's plan will fail.

3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
Wrong. Shell game. What if there are many available lots but nobody wants to buy?

4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
Wrong. Out of scope.

5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.
Wrong. Out of scope

Hope it helps.

Hi pqhai
I have a query. In option B, what if the "traditionally industrial or commercial districts" not necessarily refers to "Urban waterfront properties". No where in the options it states that ONLY "waterfront properties" are marked as "traditionally industrial or commercial districts".
That's why I marked C, which states that properties lot are available as earlier it was not developed.

Any thoughts???

Thanks,
Chanakya

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 20

Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 593

Kudos [?]: 460 [1], given: 200

Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2015, 13:51
1
KUDOS
vscid wrote:
In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many coastal American cities that the waterfront was an undesirable location for residential buildings. As a result, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce. Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.
2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.
3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase.
4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
5]Properties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront.

I've encountered this questions in the second MGMAT CAT. The correct answer here is just restating the portion stated in the question stem (see the hghlited part above)
As many say here that the Info from (D) is not earlier stated in the text and thus (D) is incorrect - I don't agree here, it's a strengthen question, so you can not discard an answer choice because of the new information, actually by this type of questions you have almost always new information that supports the conlusion somehow. It's NOT an Assumption question or "Must be True" Question, in which you can not use new information, which has not be already stated earlier in the text. I don't think that this question resembles the intended logic (real GMAT).
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Kudos [?]: 460 [1], given: 200

Manager
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 135

Kudos [?]: 120 [1], given: 424

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2016, 11:01
1
KUDOS
I was torn between B and D both are not satisfying.

Just because homeowners are willing to pay large sum does not equate to large profits as the costs could equally as large. This derives from the equation Profit = Revenue - Costs

On the other hand, D is not out of scope. Tax incentives would drive the cost lower and given that in the passage that ', as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front. ' it can be deduced that there will be equal amounts of revenue.

If someone can explain the flaw in my thinking, please let me know.

Kudos [?]: 120 [1], given: 424

Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 694

Kudos [?]: 179 [0], given: 855

Location: United States
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2017, 03:08
Premises:
_ In the 18th and 19th centuries: Water front was an undesirable location for residential buildings and as a result it was left to industry and commerce.
_ Today: Water front is now a desirable location for residential buildings (Seen as prestigious) and large sums paid for homes along the beach front.

Analysis of the Argument :-
Developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them. The basis for that claim is that people pay large sums for beach front homes and we are asked to strengthen this argument.

Conclusion: Waterfront properties are a profitable investment.
A- they have more money doesn't mean they will use it to buy waterfront properties.
B- Since in the 18th and 19th century the waterfront has been filled with commercial and industrial districts. If homeowners are willing to spend money on properties in these districts, then the conclusion is supported! This is it ! (Correct).
C- Lots are available for purchase does not mean they will be purchased nor that buildings will be erected.
D- Rehabilitation is not what the argument is about.
E- The properties along the waterfront cost less than those in interior- Doesn't mean that they are more attractive to homeowners and we don't know if the money spent on them is enough to generate profit for investors.

Hence D is best choice here.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Kudos [?]: 179 [0], given: 855

Intern
Joined: 16 Feb 2017
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 577

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2017, 11:59
Premise 1: 18th and 19th century, much of the waterfront in these cities was never developed aesthetically and instead was left to industry and commerce.

Premise 2: Today, however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front.

Conclusion: A developer who wishes to make a large profit would be wise to buy urban waterfront lots and erect residential buildings on them.

Question Type: Strengthen

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim made about urban waterfront properties?

1]People today have more money, relatively speaking, to spend on real estate than they did in previous centuries.

Okay so they do have the money to spend on real estates but why would they spend on waterfront properties? why wouldn't they pay for central districts/downtowns? Can't assume more money to spend = spending on waterfront properties

2]Homeowners will be willing to spend large sums on residential properties in traditionally industrial or commercial districts.----
This strengthens the conclusion!

3]Many urban waterfront lots are available for purchase -- available? great but why should one buy them? doesn't strengthen.

4]Many coastal American cities are encouraging developers to rehabilitate the waterfront through tax incentives.
[i]So they erect the water front properties but that doesn't meant that people would buy them[i]

5]Proper ties in interior residential districts in coastal American cities are significantly more expensive than those along the waterfront -- so they are cheaper than interior residential districts. but what if suburbs are cheaper?
_________________

Click Kudos if this helps!
Nash

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 577

Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2015
Posts: 76

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 231

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V32
GMAT 2: 620 Q48 V27
Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jun 2017, 19:39
Hi Experts, Can you please help with option D here? Per my understanding the goal here is that developers must be able to make large profits.
My reasoning:

B) Provides support in terms of revenue and is in line with assumption that people will buy these properties. But its also given that people have paid large sums for the properties before. So...

Here is why I think D is a better option as it provides new information that the profits will be large because there will be tax incentives.

I found a similar GMAT Prep question that focuses on this points: (here all other answers are wrong because they don't relate to the goal of increasing profit)

https://gmatclub.com/forum/outsourcing- ... ml?kudos=1

_________________

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 231

Re: In the 18th and 19th centuries, it was believed in many   [#permalink] 18 Jun 2017, 19:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by