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

 It is currently 28 May 2017, 18:43

### 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 virtually any industry, technological improvements

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 52
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 974 [5] , given: 0

In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Aug 2012, 14:53
5
KUDOS
19
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

84% (02:18) correct 16% (01:42) wrong based on 2252 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

OG2013 CR #8
OG2017 CR 559 P514
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [24] , given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2012, 14:06
24
KUDOS
Expert's post
betterscore wrote:
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

Hi, there. I'm happy to help with this.

Of course, this is OG13, CR #8, a new question that did not appear in the OG12. Let's look at this prompt.

GENERAL RULE: In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked.
FACT/EVIDENCE: In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries.
CONCLUSION: Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

We are told that technological improvements cause increases in labor productivity --- to use the language of formal logic, we know that technological improvements are sufficient for an increase in labor productivity. This is quite different from saying that: technological improvements are necessary for an increase in labor productivity. In other words, the argument is implicitly assuming that absolutely nothing else ---- labor conditions, local economic conditions, difference in shipping cost for materials or sale, etc. etc. --- would affect labor productivity. That's crazy. All kinds of other things also could affect labor productivity. Technological improvements are sufficient but not necessary for an increase in labor productivity.
Parland has higher labor productivity than does Vergia. One possible explanation could be a technological superiority, but again, there are a dozen other things that might differ between the two regions and might account for the difference in labor productivity.
The answer that best summarizes this flaw is (C) --- assuming that one particular cause is the only possible cause, or in other words, assuming that a sufficient cause is thereby also a necessary cause.

Does all this make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 361
Schools: IE'14, ISB'14, Kellogg'15
WE 1: 7 Yrs in Automobile (Commercial Vehicle industry)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 399 [2] , given: 50

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2012, 15:21
2
KUDOS
Flaw in logic Question. Pre-thinking: No other alternate reason exists for the high productivity.
_________________

Regards
SD
-----------------------------
Press Kudos if you like my post.
Debrief 610-540-580-710(Long Journey): http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-600-540-580-710-finally-achieved-in-4th-attempt-142456.html

Senior Manager
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 348
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 252 [0], given: 27

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2012, 10:19
Clear C , argument states Tech Adv ---> High Labor Productivity , doesnt consider any other ways in which Labor productivity can be high.
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

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

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2012, 06:23
Thanks! It is really understood from your account!
Manager
Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 136
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.9
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 16

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2012, 09:08
Hey Mike, even i got C as an answer, but can we do this using the method of validation? I mean sometimes, in questions like this, i m not able to understand half the options. So , how do i go abt it?
Manager
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 200
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 3

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2012, 19:21
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes. - Correct because it assumes that a higher labor productivity leads to advanced technology.

I don't think i have come across this Q in OG 13, 12 & 11? Was this from OG 10?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [0], given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2012, 21:50
mehulsayani wrote:
Hey Mike, even i got C as an answer, but can we do this using the method of validation? I mean sometimes, in questions like this, i m not able to understand half the options. So , how do i go abt it?

Forgive me, but I am not familiar with that terminology "method of validation" --- what does that mean, and whose term is that?

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 197
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 22

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2012, 00:54
The opposite cannot be assumed to be true.

Thank you Mike for an in-depth explanation.
Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 269

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2012, 22:49
mikemcgarry wrote:
betterscore wrote:
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

Hi, there. I'm happy to help with this.

Of course, this is OG13, CR #8, a new question that did not appear in the OG12. Let's look at this prompt.

GENERAL RULE: In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked.
FACT/EVIDENCE: In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries.
CONCLUSION: Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

We are told that technological improvements cause increases in labor productivity --- to use the language of formal logic, we know that technological improvements are sufficient for an increase in labor productivity. This is quite different from saying that: technological improvements are necessary for an increase in labor productivity. In other words, the argument is implicitly assuming that absolutely nothing else ---- labor conditions, local economic conditions, difference in shipping cost for materials or sale, etc. etc. --- would affect labor productivity. That's crazy. All kinds of other things also could affect labor productivity. Technological improvements are sufficient but not necessary for an increase in labor productivity.
Parland has higher labor productivity than does Vergia. One possible explanation could be a technological superiority, but again, there are a dozen other things that might differ between the two regions and might account for the difference in labor productivity.
The answer that best summarizes this flaw is (C) --- assuming that one particular cause is the only possible cause, or in other words, assuming that a sufficient cause is thereby also a necessary cause.

Does all this make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike

Thanks Mike

But can you explain why is e) wrong?
_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [2] , given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2012, 12:40
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
getgyan wrote:
Thanks Mike, But can you explain why is e) wrong?

In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

To "presuppose the truth of the conclusion" means --- the conclusion is a necessary assumption for some piece of the evidence.

Here, conclusion is highly specific --- it concerns only Parland's industries, compared to Vergia's. Anything going on in those two podunk places doesn't necessarily have implications for events anywhere else.

In order for earlier statements to "presuppose the truth of the conclusion", the conclusion has to be a general statement, applicable to large number of situations. That is not at all the case here.

Does all that make sense?

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1669
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 103

Kudos [?]: 993 [0], given: 109

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2012, 18:00
+1 C

The author assumes that there is only one cause for more productivity.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 269

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2012, 20:58
mikemcgarry wrote:
getgyan wrote:
Thanks Mike, But can you explain why is e) wrong?

In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

To "presuppose the truth of the conclusion" means --- the conclusion is a necessary assumption for some piece of the evidence.

Here, conclusion is highly specific --- it concerns only Parland's industries, compared to Vergia's. Anything going on in those two podunk places doesn't necessarily have implications for events anywhere else.

In order for earlier statements to "presuppose the truth of the conclusion", the conclusion has to be a general statement, applicable to large number of situations. That is not at all the case here.

Does all that make sense?

Mike

Thanks Mike

But I am still not very clear. Last option has two parts
It makes a distinction
1) that presupposes the truth of the conclusion (conclusion i.e. Parland is technologically more advanced than Vergia) - I find this true
2) that (conclusion) is to be established (Is it not?)

I am new at CR
_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [1] , given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 16:15
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
getgyan wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

Thanks Mike

But I am still not very clear. Last option has two parts
It makes a distinction
1) that presupposes the truth of the conclusion (conclusion i.e. Parland is technologically more advanced than Vergia) - I find this true
2) that (conclusion) is to be established (Is it not?)
I am new at CR

Dear getgyan,

First of all, if you are new to CR, I highly recommend these blogs:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/introducti ... reasoning/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/arguments- ... -the-gmat/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/formal-log ... reasoning/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/save-time- ... questions/

Also, your reading of that particular answer choice, (E), is off, and it's a grammar problem, not a logic problem. In the final part of that sentence...
the conclusion that is to be established
...the phrase "that is to be established" is simply a relative clause that modifies the word "conclusion" --- it is in there to make sure everything is hyper-clear, almost to the points of redundancy. There is no extra logic happening in that part of the sentence ---- the entire phrase "the conclusion that is to be established" is just a fancy way of saying "the main conclusion of the argument."
You are reading those two "that"-clauses as if there were in parallel, and they are NOT --- if they were, the would be joined by the word "and" --- instead, the first "that"-clause modifies "distinction" and explains what kind of distinction --- that's where the meat of the logic is ---- and nested within this first "that"-clause is a second, near-redundant, clause simply modifying the word "conclusion."

Grammar supports logic -- that's important to remember both on GMAT CR and on GMAT SC.

Does all this make sense?

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3183
Followers: 860

Kudos [?]: 7327 [0], given: 1065

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 17:04
Generally speaking, I think that infer too much on GMAT is wrong.

E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

Suddenly jump in my head that here nothing leads us to a distinction. Straight.

Please Mike correct me if I'm wrong
_________________
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [0], given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 20:51
carcass wrote:
Generally speaking, I think that infer too much on GMAT is wrong.

I agree --- when the GMAT says "infer", it is looking for something that is little more than a hair's breadth away from what is clearly stated in black and white.

carcass wrote:
E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.
Suddenly jump in my head that here nothing leads us to a distinction. Straight.
Please Mike correct me if I'm wrong

True, that's an even more basic problem with (E) --- there's really no distinction being made at all, so there certainly can't be a distinction that presupposes the conclusion.
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Manager
Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 136
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.9
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 16

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2012, 06:37
mikemcgarry wrote:
mehulsayani wrote:
Hey Mike, even i got C as an answer, but can we do this using the method of validation? I mean sometimes, in questions like this, i m not able to understand half the options. So , how do i go abt it?

Forgive me, but I am not familiar with that terminology "method of validation" --- what does that mean, and whose term is that?

Mike

I mean in questions like this, sometimes, the terminology used is unfamiliar. So, how should I go about such questions using the method of elimination.
(by method of validation, i meant how to check whether the given option is valid here or not)
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3183
Followers: 860

Kudos [?]: 7327 [0], given: 1065

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2012, 08:06
mehulsayani wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
mehulsayani wrote:
Hey Mike, even i got C as an answer, but can we do this using the method of validation? I mean sometimes, in questions like this, i m not able to understand half the options. So , how do i go abt it?

Forgive me, but I am not familiar with that terminology "method of validation" --- what does that mean, and whose term is that?

Mike

I mean in questions like this, sometimes, the terminology used is unfamiliar. So, how should I go about such questions using the method of elimination.
(by method of validation, i meant how to check whether the given option is valid here or not)

Truly understand what the stimulus says
_________________
Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 269

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2012, 22:00
mikemcgarry wrote:
getgyan wrote:
mikemcgarry wrote:
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.
(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.
(C) It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.
(D) It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.
(E) It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

Thanks Mike

But I am still not very clear. Last option has two parts
It makes a distinction
1) that presupposes the truth of the conclusion (conclusion i.e. Parland is technologically more advanced than Vergia) - I find this true
2) that (conclusion) is to be established (Is it not?)
I am new at CR

Dear getgyan,

First of all, if you are new to CR, I highly recommend these blogs:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/introducti ... reasoning/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/arguments- ... -the-gmat/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/formal-log ... reasoning/
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/save-time- ... questions/

Also, your reading of that particular answer choice, (E), is off, and it's a grammar problem, not a logic problem. In the final part of that sentence...
the conclusion that is to be established
...the phrase "that is to be established" is simply a relative clause that modifies the word "conclusion" --- it is in there to make sure everything is hyper-clear, almost to the points of redundancy. There is no extra logic happening in that part of the sentence ---- the entire phrase "the conclusion that is to be established" is just a fancy way of saying "the main conclusion of the argument."
You are reading those two "that"-clauses as if there were in parallel, and they are NOT --- if they were, the would be joined by the word "and" --- instead, the first "that"-clause modifies "distinction" and explains what kind of distinction --- that's where the meat of the logic is ---- and nested within this first "that"-clause is a second, near-redundant, clause simply modifying the word "conclusion."

Grammar supports logic -- that's important to remember both on GMAT CR and on GMAT SC.

Does all this make sense?

Mike

Thanks Mike

For the explanantion and for the blogs. It makes more sense to me now.
_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4044
Followers: 1421

Kudos [?]: 6797 [0], given: 84

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2012, 14:10
mehulsayani wrote:
I mean in questions like this, sometimes, the terminology used is unfamiliar. So, how should I go about such questions using the method of elimination. (by method of validation, i meant how to check whether the given option is valid here or not)

Dear mehulsayani

The terminology here is quite straightforward. There is no jargon or terminology specific to any particular discipline. This came from the OG and is very much representative of the language you will see on GMAT CR. If this level of analysis is unfamiliar, you need to amp up your reading --- the NYT, the WSJ, and the Economist Magazine.

See these blogs:

Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Re: In virtually any industry, technological improvements   [#permalink] 10 Sep 2012, 14:10

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 39 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Top Line Technologies and Eureka Industries distribute the 6 13 Feb 2017, 16:57
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs 0 10 Jul 2013, 05:00
2 Technological improvements have made electric cars 21 10 Jul 2012, 06:08
Over the last five years, technological improvements have 34 16 May 2016, 21:01
156 Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have 58 01 May 2017, 01:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by