Nearly one in three subscribers to Financial Forecaster is a

Question

Nearly one in three subscribers to Financial Forecaster is a millionaire, and over half are in top management. Shouldn’t you subscribe to Financial Forecaster now?

A reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management would be most likely to act in accordance with the advertisement’s suggestion if he or she drew which of the following questionable conclusions invited by the advertisement?

A. Among finance-related periodicals Financial Forecaster provides the most detailed financial information.
B. Top managers cannot do their jobs properly without reading Financial Forecaster.
C. The advertisement is placed where those who will be likely to read it are millionaires.
D. The subscribers mentioned were helped to become millionaires or join top management by reading Financial Forecaster.
E. Only those who will in fact become millionaires, or at least top managers, will read the advertisement.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

In critical reasoning, our job is to read critically.

(1/3) of subscribers to Financial Forecaster are millionaires, and over 1/2 are in top management.
Shouldn’t you subscribe to Financial Forecaster now?

So the first thing that comes to my mind is that they are trying to sell FF to me by giving these stats. They are implying that people who subscribe to FF become millionaires and top managers. If I were gullible, I would perhaps deduce this and subscribe to FF.
But what if people who become millionaires and top managers subscribe to FF afterwards because it gives them some info they need in their roles? Then my subscribing to FF is unlikely to make me a millionaire/top manager. 
Now I am happy with my analysis and move on to the question stem.

A reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management would be most likely to act in accordance with the advertisement’s suggestion if he or she drew which of the following questionable conclusions invited by the advertisement?

So I think about it like this - I will act as per the ad's suggestion (subscribe to the FF) if I conclude what from the ad?

This is simple! I know they are implying that people who subscribe to FF become millionaires and top managers. If I believe in this, I will subscribe to FF. This is mentioned in (D)

Answer (D)

A. Among finance-related periodicals. Financial Forecaster provides the most detailed financial information.
This is not a conclusion that one can draw from the ad. Hence not correct.

B. Top managers cannot do their jobs properly without reading Financial Forecaster.
This is the smart me thinking. That top managers subscribe to FF because they need to. They don't become top managers by subscribing to it. But what they are looking for is the conclusion of a gullible person. So not correct.

C. The advertisement is placed where those who will be likely to read it are millionaires.
Another possibility of smart deduction. Perhaps the FF targets millionaires only and hence has millionaires as subscribers. But again, what they are looking for is the conclusion of a gullible person. So not correct.

E. Only those who will in fact become millionaires, or at least top managers, will read the advertisement.
Again, this says that it caters to the cream of the society - people who are likely to become millionaires or top managers. Again, this is not what we need. We need the conclusion of a person who falls for the ad, not the smart person.

pqhai · Answer

ANALYZE THE QUESTION STEM:

The most difficult part of this question is the "question stem". I would paraphrase it like:

A reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management  would be most likely to act in accordance with the advertisement’s suggestion  if he or she believes that....?

But  What is "act in accordance with the advertisement suggestion" . It means "you should subscribe FF now"

==> The question stem will be:  A reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management would subscribe FF if he or she believes that....

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

The advertisement' FACT: 1/3   subscribers   to FF are millionaires, and over 1/2 are in top management.
The advertisement's CONCLUSION: You should subscribe to FF now

Because the advertisement used the word " subscribers " in order to make a new reader believes that "he/she will be a millionaire or top management IF he/she reads FF".

This is exactly what a new reader believes, ==> so he/she would subscribe FF.

Hence, D is correct.

Hope that helps.

ankurgupta03 · Answer

The reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management would believe that the Financial forecaster has helped other people becoming millionaire and top management peoples, hence the option C

marcovg4 · Answer

For me It´s D.

People who are neither a millionaire nor a top manager, are likely to read the Financial Forecaster, if reading the journal, would help them become a millionaire or a top manager.

Abhishek009 · Answer

The highlighted part of the question stem asks us to doubt the Argument presented in the stimulus...

The stimulus states -

1. 1/3 Subscribers to FF = Millionaire 
 2. > 50% are in top management.

And then appeals whether this is a sufficient reason to start subscribing to FF...

None but option (D) challenges the reasoning presented , it may be such that millionaires or top management personnel started reading FF after becoming millionaires or joining top Managerial positions.

Reading FF ≠ Becoming millionaires or join top management !!!, Hence Answer must be (D)

sony1000 · Answer

The wordin in answer E "Only those who will in fact become millionaires, or at least top managers, will read the advertisement" is too extreme correct or is there any other reason for which is considered and incorrect answer.

SonGoku · Answer

Question: what is the secret ingredient that brings a person other than millionaire or top management guy to subscribe to Financial Forecaster?
 
So what, Why would i subscribe if it provides most detailed info.it is no way benificial to me.
Option A doesn't answer the question.
 
Who cares about top managers doing their jobs? There's nothing useful to me.
Option B doesn't answer the question.
 
Well I'm not a millionaire so this ad is no way useful to me as I'm not a millionaire.
Option C doesn't Answer the question
 
Hmmm....I'll think of it because I might become a millionaire if i subscribe to it.
There's the catch...Keep it and check if there is something better than this.
 
What nonsense?reading itself makes me millionaire means why would i subscribe to your magazine?
Option E doesn't answer the question
 D is the Winner

BhishmaNaidu99 · Answer

This arguments is saying that , FF is the main reason for those people to become millionaires and to be in top management,

so the option which goes with the causality is the correct answer.
A. It gives the information about the content in the FF but nothing about the causality 
B .It indirectly says that to work properly top managers subscribe FF , which is against the causality.
C it also says that , only millionaires can read the ad, so there is possibility that one who is already millionaire will subscribe
D This shows the correct causality .
E this option also says the reverse of the causality of the arguement.

So the option is D

CEdward · Answer

Nearly one in three subscribers to Financial Forecaster is a millionaire, and over half are in top management. Shouldn’t you subscribe to Financial Forecaster now?

A reader who is neither a millionaire nor in top management would be most likely to act in accordance with the advertisement’s suggestion if he or she drew which of the following questionable conclusions invited by the advertisement?

A. Among finance-related periodicals. Financial Forecaster provides the  most detailed financial information. 
We don’t know this.
B. Top managers  cannot do their jobs properly  without reading Financial Forecaster.
We have no information to make this conclusion.
C. The advertisement is placed where those  who will be likely to read it are millionaires. 
We don’t know the location of placement. Besides 1/3 is a millionaire which leaves 2/3 who aren’t…2/3 > 1/3 so why should we, on that basis, conclude that the advertisement is placed where readers are likely to be millionaires?
D. The subscribers mentioned were helped to become millionaires or join top management by reading Financial Forecaster.
Correct. Keep in mind, this is a questionable conclusion that the reader can draw. Is it likely that the subscribers mentioned were helped to become millionaires? Maybe, maybe not. 
E.  Only  those who will in fact become millionaires, or at least top managers, will read the advertisement.
No…what about the remaining 2/3 who read it and aren’t millionaires? Are they likely to become millionaires?

Eric001 · Answer

Plz tel why option C is incorrect?

Nina1987 · Answer

Bunuel ,  nightblade354  : the period looks like a typo. can u pls remove it. thanks

Bunuel · Answer

__________________________
Removed. \Thank you!

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

Nearly one in three subscribers to Financial Forecaster is a

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Nearly one in three subscribers to Financial Forecaster is a

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards