It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 10:30

### 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 past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 826 [1], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 01:24
1
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

48% (01:54) correct 52% (01:46) wrong based on 162 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional monopolies and operated with little regard for what customers wanted. In recent years, with improvements to the Ostronian national highway network, the railroad companies have faced heavy competition from long-distance trucking companies. But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses, the companies continue to disregard customersâ€™ needs and desires.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them?

(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.

(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.

(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.

(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.

(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by abhimahna on 15 Oct 2017, 10:24, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 826 [1], given: 0

VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1111

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 01:33
A for me

(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
-> see the statement "But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses, the companies continue to disregard customersâ€™ needs and desires."

(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.

(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
-> We have no information on that, just that they disregard customersâ€™ needs and desires.

(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
-> No information about the efficiency . We know that companies still disregard customersâ€™ needs and desires

(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 10:45
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
- Not sure of this. We're told they operate at a loss, but we're not sure if they will fold up because of the operating loss.

(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
- Follows the logic of the passage closely. Choice B is good.

(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
- Not nescesary. We're only told they have little regard, but not sure what are the details of the disregard (is it high pricing, or bad service or something else ?)

(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
- Out of scope

(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
_ Not important with survival, but whether they have subsidies.

B it is.

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 721

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Location: Milwaukee
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 11:31
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.
_________________

Praveen

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2228

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 11:40
This is a case where all choices seem pretty good. However only E is absolutely right.

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 27

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 15:18
It is 'E' for me.
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.
Nothing is mentioned about to what extent are the losses. We cannot assume that some of the companies will shut shop and some will continue to operate.

(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.
Cannot say this is definite from the passage

(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.
Reject: There is no mention of Price in passage.

(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
Reject: This is unnecessary and there are implications for efficiency.

(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
Correct: Holds good from the passage i.e. passage mentions that companies with no regards for customers' desires have survived.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1111

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 17:25
I still continue to fight for my A
I don't see where is the flow in it because it is stated :

"But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses"

-> if no more subsidies, railroad companies can not operate

However, I must admit that E seems also to be the answer...what's OA ?

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 17:56
E it is. I did not see the 'nonetheless' when i was attempting the question.

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 19:44
praveen_rao7 wrote:
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.

Hello, Praveen

E says 'some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'

Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 19:51
Hi, HongHu.

Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.

We cannot make sure that if no government subsidies, companies don't continue to operate.

That's the rule of thumb.

If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.

Am I right? Please correct me.

Thanks

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1111

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 20:54
chunjuwu wrote:
Hi, HongHu.

Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.

If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.

Am I right? Please correct me.

Thanks

chunjuwu, maybe I am wrong but I disagree with the use of "if" -> the sentence is using "because" so :

because A -> B
if no A -> no B

the difference is important between IF and BECAUSE

do we have a OA for this one ? even with no explanation so that ce can figure it out...

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 554

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Location: SF Bay Area, USA
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 22:44
A is wrong because there is no in no information provided that tells us that those companies will not continue to operate without subsidies - may be they will become more efficient without subsidies!

Contra-Positive logic applies to the following pattern and is always true:
If A, then B,
If not B, then not A.

If Goverment subsidy ->companies operate
If companies don't operate, -> Goverment does not give subsidy

Wrong Logic:

If A, then B
If not A then not B

is wrong logic

If Goverment subsidy -> companies operate
If Goverment does not give subsidy -> companies don't operate
is wrong

E) is clearly the answer as we don't have to make any assumptions.

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 721

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Location: Milwaukee
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2005, 23:17
chunjuwu wrote:
praveen_rao7 wrote:
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.

Hello, Praveen

E says 'some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'

Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?

a little means ---> some
little means---> almost nothing

same thing with a few and few
_________________

Praveen

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2228

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 08:25
chunjuwu wrote:
Hi, HongHu.

Argument says because of government subsidies, companies continue to operate.

We cannot make sure that if no government subsidies, companies don't continue to operate.

That's the rule of thumb.

If A, then B,
If not A, then not B. It's not necessary.

Am I right? Please correct me.

Thanks

Good logic. :b: I'm not sure what "it" refers to in you next sentence "It's not necessary." I think you meant that A is not necessary condition of B, right? And that'd be correct.

When I first saw A I thought it may be right too. But then I read C and realized that both A and C could be right, but they can't be both right since there's only one right choice, yet we can't say one is more right than the other, therefore both of them must be wrong.

In less confusing words, what I just said is: If government stops subsidizing, the companies may go broke, they may need to raise their prices, or they may need to some other things such as reforms or something. We don't know which one for sure. Since the questions asks what must be true, not may be true, these are not our answers.

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2228

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 08:28
praveen_rao7 wrote:
chunjuwu wrote:
praveen_rao7 wrote:
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.

Hello, Praveen

E says 'some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'

Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?

a little means ---> some
little means---> almost nothing

same thing with a few and few

Almost nothing still is not nothing though. That's why we are not absolutely sure. We need to choose the one answer that we are absolutely sure for this questions.

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Dec 2004
Posts: 273

Kudos [?]: 201 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 08:55
(A) If the government of Ostronia ceases to subsidize railroad companies, few of those companies will continue to operate.

Wrong! The companies may still operate without the subsidies.
If A then B, If not A, cannot say anything about B

(B) Few companies in Ostronia that have received subsidies from the government have taken the needs and desires of their customers into account.

Wrong, out of scope.

(C) Without government subsidies, railroad companies in Ostronia would have to increase the prices they charge their customers.

Wrong, out of scope. They may chose to decrease further service to customers to recover losses.
(D) The transportation system in Ostronia is no more efficient today than it was in the past.
Wrong, Out of scope. It may be little better. but not good enough.

(E) In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived.
Ther use of "some" makes it relevant. its certainly true that some companies have survived disregarding the customers' needs.

"E" is my choice.

Kudos [?]: 201 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 10:16
Antmavel wrote:
I still continue to fight for my A
I don't see where is the flow in it because it is stated :

"But because of government subsidies that have permitted Ostronian railroad companies to operate even while incurring substantial losses"

-> if no more subsidies, railroad companies can not operate

However, I must admit that E seems also to be the answer...what's OA ?

Antmavel, A cannot be the right answer. Choice (A) talks about a number of the companies going bust if they lose the government subsidies. But this is not supported for in the passage. To arrive at this conclusion, you will probably need another assumption (something you shuoldn't make off hand just to make your answer choice fit in) or another premise would have to be given to you.

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 10:24
chunjuwu wrote:
praveen_rao7 wrote:
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.

Hello, Praveen

E says 'some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'

Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?

Another way to see this would be "In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived."
We know from the passage that at least some survived and they continue to disregard their customers.

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 19:46
OA is E.

Thank you.

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1205

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Mar 2005, 19:54
ywilfred wrote:
chunjuwu wrote:
praveen_rao7 wrote:
E it is

B says Few companies actually cared for customers, based on the info it is possible none of the companies really cared. Hence E stick out as the only option.

Hello, Praveen

E says 'some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires...'

Doesn't it also said some companies actually cared for customers?

Another way to see this would be "In recent years, some companies in Ostronia that have had little regard for the desires of their customers have nonetheless survived."
We know from the passage that at least some survived and they continue to disregard their customers.

Thanks ywilfred.

That'd be right.

Kudos [?]: 826 [0], given: 0

Re: In the past, the railroads in Ostronia were run as regional   [#permalink] 15 Mar 2005, 19:54

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 30 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by