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

 It is currently 29 Mar 2017, 19:52

### 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 USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: GMAT Streetfighter!!
Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Posts: 59
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Finance
GPA: 3.87
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 83 [2] , given: 21

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2013, 18:57
2
KUDOS
13
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

50% (02:53) correct 50% (02:10) wrong based on 517 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
B
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by jgomey on 23 Jan 2013, 15:13, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1420
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 179

Kudos [?]: 1405 [0], given: 62

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 03:39
jgomey wrote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Lets chat first

Hii.
I feel its B.
My reasoning is that since there is a shortage of pure aquariums, therefore this shortage becomes a reason why there is difference.
Let me know if more clarification is required.
Regards.
_________________
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3159
Followers: 822

Kudos [?]: 6948 [0], given: 1053

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 04:49
I think too is B because all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 23 Nov 2012
Posts: 35
Location: France
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Said (D)
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE: Sales (Investment Banking)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [3] , given: 19

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 06:12
3
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Quote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo
Wrong Wrong direction if local residents (LRs) would be twice as likely to visit A then there would be less of them in Z. The passage supports that there are rather fewer LRs in A.

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Correct One could conclude that people from other regions will go on vacation to visit A but not Z since they could do it at home. This would explain why the propotion of visitors to LRs is higher in A.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1
Wrong Out of scope. We do not care about the number of Z or A.

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.
Wrong This says nothing about the relationship of the number of visitors to LRs in A or Z.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

Wrong Size says nothing about the relationship between the number of visitors to LRs.
_________________

Hodor?

Kudo!

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1420
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 179

Kudos [?]: 1405 [0], given: 62

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 07:40
I feel number can play a crucial role and the reason why C is being kicked is that it talks about NEW CONSTRUCTED ZOOS. lets see what others think.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2013
Posts: 80
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 1

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 15:03
Am really having trouble in understanding this today:-(
Manager
Status: GMAT Streetfighter!!
Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Posts: 59
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Finance
GPA: 3.87
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 21

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 16:59
Triforce wrote:
Quote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo
Wrong Wrong direction if local residents (LRs) would be twice as likely to visit A then there would be less of them in Z. The passage supports that there are rather fewer LRs in A.

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.
Correct One could conclude that people from other regions will go on vacation to visit A but not Z since they could do it at home. This would explain why the propotion of visitors to LRs is higher in A.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1
Wrong Out of scope. We do not care about the number of Z or A.

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.
Wrong This says nothing about the relationship of the number of visitors to LRs in A or Z.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

Wrong Size says nothing about the relationship between the number of visitors to LRs.

Excellent Analysis!

I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows:

Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction.

B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium."

Last edited by jgomey on 23 Jan 2013, 18:52, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Status: GMAT Streetfighter!!
Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Posts: 59
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Finance
GPA: 3.87
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 21

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 18:49
Marcab wrote:
I feel number can play a crucial role and the reason why C is being kicked is that it talks about NEW CONSTRUCTED ZOOS. lets see what others think.

It's a trap-both nasty and deadly, and, perhaps, even downright dirty.
Manager
Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 58
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
GPA: 3.89
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 70 [0], given: 13

Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 20:15
I also chose B, but for a different reason.

My thinking was that most pure aquariums are located in popular tourist destinations outside of metropolitan areas, so most of the visitors are on vacation. However, most of the zoos are in big cities and are thus mostly visited by local residents.

The creators of the question probably meant the other explanation, though, namely that if people can go to a zoo at home, they choose a pure aquarium while on vacation.
_________________

Sergey Orshanskiy, Ph.D.
I tutor in NYC: http://www.wyzant.com/Tutors/NY/New-York/7948121/#ref=1RKFOZ

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7255
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2205

Kudos [?]: 14374 [3] , given: 222

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 21:26
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
jgomey wrote:

I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows:

Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction.

B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium."

Actually, notice another thing. You don't have to explain why more people are visiting pure aquariums (actually that may not be true. Overall, the number of people visiting pure aquariums might be lesser). You have to explain why visitors to pure aquariums are 50% vacationers (and other 50% are perhaps local people) while visitors to zoos are only 25% vacationers while other 75% are local people. The number of people visiting the pure aquarium and the number visiting the zoo are not an issue at all. The issue is the different demography: vacationers vs locals.
The reasons can be two:
- Vacationers find pure aquariums attractive for some reason (as B explains - its because there are fewer pure aquariums)
- Local people prefer zoo over pure aquarium (probably because their kids want to visit zoos and often)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199 Veritas Prep Reviews Last edited by VeritasPrepKarishma on 24 Sep 2014, 22:09, edited 1 time in total. Manager Status: GMAT Streetfighter!! Joined: 22 Nov 2012 Posts: 59 Location: United States Concentration: Healthcare, Finance GPA: 3.87 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 21 Re: In the USA, vacationers account for more than half [#permalink] ### Show Tags 23 Jan 2013, 22:59 VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: jgomey wrote: I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows: Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction. B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium." Actually, notice another thing. You don't have to explain why more people are visiting pure aquariums (actually that may not be true. Overall, the number of people visiting pure aquariums might be lesser). You have to explain why visitors to pure aquariums are 50% vacationers (and other 50% are perhaps local people) while visitors to zoos are only 25% vacationers while other 75% are local people. The number of people visiting the pure aquarium and the number visiting the zoo are not an issue at all. The issue is the different demography: vacationers vs locals. The reasons can be two: - Vacationers find pure aquariums attractive for some reason (as C explains - its because there are fewer pure aquariums) - Local people prefer zoo over pure aquarium (probably because their kids want to visit zoos and often) That makes sense. Thank you for the explanation GMAT Club Legend Joined: 01 Oct 2013 Posts: 10665 Followers: 959 Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 0 Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink] ### Show Tags 03 Jul 2014, 03:55 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. Intern Joined: 04 Feb 2014 Posts: 10 Location: United States Concentration: Technology, Social Entrepreneurship GPA: 3.75 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 171 Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink] ### Show Tags 08 Jul 2014, 11:47 Hi, This is a paradox question. In a paradox question, incorrect answer choices are those which: 1. explain only one side of the paradox, 2. similarities and differences e.g. when a stem contains a paradox where two items are different and answer choice which explains why two are same, can never be an answer.( Power Score CR Concept) Here applying rule1, only B qualifies. 1 paradox: vacationers visit aquariums in large numbers 2 paradox: vacationers visit zoo aquarium in less numbers. Hope it clarifies. Regards, Ashish Senior Manager Joined: 08 Apr 2012 Posts: 463 Followers: 2 Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 58 Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink] ### Show Tags 24 Sep 2014, 09:19 VeritasPrepKarishma wrote: jgomey wrote: I fell for C. My reasoning was as follows: Since more aquariums are built, more aquariums exist compared to Zoos. This explains why more people are visiting aquariums. MY REASONING was clearly flawed, because I did not consider the possibility that more Zoos exist overall, despite the new construction. B is the correct choice. As indicated earlier, less aquariums exist compared to the number of Zoos, so people must travel in order to visit a "Pure Aquarium." Actually, notice another thing. You don't have to explain why more people are visiting pure aquariums (actually that may not be true. Overall, the number of people visiting pure aquariums might be lesser). You have to explain why visitors to pure aquariums are 50% vacationers (and other 50% are perhaps local people) while visitors to zoos are only 25% vacationers while other 75% are local people. The number of people visiting the pure aquarium and the number visiting the zoo are not an issue at all. The issue is the different demography: vacationers vs locals. The reasons can be two: - Vacationers find pure aquariums attractive for some reason (as C explains - its because there are fewer pure aquariums) - Local people prefer zoo over pure aquarium (probably because their kids want to visit zoos and often) Hi Karishma, I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer. Can you elaborate? Verbal Forum Moderator Joined: 16 Jun 2012 Posts: 1152 Location: United States Followers: 266 Kudos [?]: 2967 [0], given: 123 Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink] ### Show Tags 24 Sep 2014, 12:24 Good question. A lot of traps. In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope. Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums? A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo Wrong. The argument says "vacationers" in general, NOT just "local residents". B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums. Correct. B mentions the basic rule "DEMAND-SUPPLY". This is very frequently shown on GMAT. If supply is less than demand, definitely the number of vacationers going to pure aquarium must be greater than that of vacationers going to zoo. C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1 Wrong. The greater number of aquarium does not mean the greater number of vacationers. It depends on the "supply-demand" rule. D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo. Wrong. Same error as in A. The argument says "vacationers" in general, NOT just "People who visit zoos". How about people who do NOT visit zoo? D can't explain. E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby. Wrong. Th size of zoo aquarium does not directly mean the greater/less number of vacationers. Only B make sense and is correct. Takeaway: Be aware of the supply-demand logic in GMAT. Hope my simple explanation 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. Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor Joined: 16 Oct 2010 Posts: 7255 Location: Pune, India Followers: 2205 Kudos [?]: 14374 [0], given: 222 Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink] ### Show Tags 24 Sep 2014, 22:08 ronr34 wrote: Hi Karishma, I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer. Can you elaborate? The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors. _________________ Karishma Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor My Blog Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 463
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 58

Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2014, 00:33
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
ronr34 wrote:
Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?

The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors.

(b) limits the scope of this to just metropolitan areas.
But we aren't talking about tourists or citizens of metropolitan areas, so how can this be right?
Doesn't this option limit us to the sample size we are talking about?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7255
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2205

Kudos [?]: 14374 [0], given: 222

Re: In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2014, 20:42
ronr34 wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
ronr34 wrote:
Hi Karishma,
I don't understand from your post what you think is the right answer.
Can you elaborate?

The answer is (B) only. I have a typo in that post. (B) explains that there are fewer pure aquariums, not (C). So answer stays (B). Since there are fewer pure aquariums, vacationers find those attractive since they may not have pure aquariums in their own cities. This explains the higher proportion of vacationers among aquarium visitors.

(b) limits the scope of this to just metropolitan areas.
But we aren't talking about tourists or citizens of metropolitan areas, so how can this be right?
Doesn't this option limit us to the sample size we are talking about?

Option (B) implies that zoos are much more common than pure aquariums. It doesn't limit the scope to metropolitan areas. Metropolitan cities have the most facilities and infrastructure so if very few metropolitan cities have pure aquariums, it is highly likely that there are very few pure aquariums.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2013
Posts: 355
GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39
WE: General Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 181 [0], given: 403

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2015, 14:39
jgomey wrote:
In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all visitors to what are technically called "pure aquariums" but for fewer than one quarter of all visitors to zoos, which simply include a "zoo aquarium" of modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, helps to account for the difference described above between visitors to zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?

A. In cities that have both a zoo and a pure aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo

B. Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos, whereas only a few metropolitan areas have pure aquariums.

C. Over the last 10 years newly constructed pure aquariums have outnumbered newly established zoos by a factor of 2 to 1

D. People who visit zoos in a given year are two times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that year than are people who do not visit the zoo.

E. The Zoo aquariums of Zoos that are in the same city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than the aquariums of zoos that have no pure aquarium nearby.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
B

Good explanation by Ron
http://www.beatthegmat.com/cr-pure-aqua ... 19532.html
_________________

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.

I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali

In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all   [#permalink] 14 Aug 2015, 14:39
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Food allergies account for more than thirty thousand emergency departm 1 28 Sep 2014, 07:15
8 Studies show that women make at least half of all car-purchasing decis 16 04 Sep 2014, 03:23
8 Statistics show that more than half of the nation's murder 9 12 Jun 2011, 15:35
3 In the United States, vacationers account for more than half 6 26 Jan 2010, 20:40
43 In the United States, vacationers account for more than half 28 22 Mar 2009, 11:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# In the USA, Vacationers account for more than half of all

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.