It might seem that an airline could increase profits by reducing airfa

Let’s first simplify the argument:

Airlines hope to increase profits by offering across-the-board discounts on seats that would otherwise remain unfilled. This strategy has worked in terms of the total number of tickets sold, yet such discounts have actually resulted in a decrease in airlines’ profits.

Now we have to determine which answer choice resolves this paradox.

(A) The behavior of this 10% would not be able to account for the decrease on profit.

(B) The difference in cost regarding small cities and large cities is not mentioned and is thus irrelevant.

(C) Popular flights that were completely filled pre-discount are now going to make a loss because people are paying less for tickets for which they would otherwise have paid more. This is a problem esp. when we read the last part of the answer choice, which explains that the discounts aren’t attracting any new customers to the unpopular flights. Had the unpopular flights attracted passengers that wouldn’t have flown they could be deemed somewhat successful.

(D) This answer choice shows that more people – albeit a very small number – are flying, which would suggest that profits would increase very slightly. Regardless, it in no way accounts for the decrease in profits.

(E) Awareness is important, i.e. if people aren’t aware of the discounts then they are unlikely to take advantage. Still, lack of awareness does not account for why profits decreased. We need an answer choice that gives us a reason why the across-the-board discounts did not work. Only (C) does this by citing that popular flights were losing money, and unpopular flights were not able to fill more seats.

Let me know if that makes sense.