The cost of transatlantic airfare has nearly doubled over the past fiv

My vote is for E.

A - Is obviously out. Since passengers dont pay for the ticket
B - Few airlines and even if passengers remain constant these airlines will be crowded. This definitely weakens. It is not the money but the shortage or airlines driving the occupancy
C - This clearly says people dont have more money to spend, and hence they are optimg for cheaper hotels to compensate for the airfare.
D - People cant afford to go by ship (because of time constraint ) and hence are ready to shellout more money. The boom is not because people have money but they have no other option.

E - Completely out of scope. The argument is talking about of tran-atlantic flights and not the domestic flights.

The cost of transatlantic airfare has nearly doubled over the past five years, yet airlines are doing a booming business. Clearly, people today have more money to spend on vacations than they did five years ago.

All of the following, if true, would weaken the argument above EXCEPT:


(A) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.

(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.

(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.

(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.

(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers

is it E, E suggests that people re spending in domestic flights too , meaning ppl have more money, strengthening the argument...

I think the answer is E.
I did a very similar question today in PR's Verbal Bin3.

A. The reason why airlines are doing well is because of an alternative cause ie. companies refunding their money, not because of the travelers having enough money.
B. If the reason people are spending on flight tickets is because they have no other option (limited no. of choices, and increased costs by all airlines), it does not support the given reason of people spending money just because they have it, but because they don't have an option. Given the option, they probably wouldn't spend so much on it. I hope this makes sense!?
C. If people are finding ways to save money through shorter vacations & cheaper hotels, they probably do not have "more money to spend on vacations than they did five years ago". This also weakens the argument.
D. Again, the reason people opt for the quicker, yet more expensive mode of transport (flights) is because the alternative is too time-consuming, NOT because they have more money to spend.
E. How an airline would do depends on income from 2 segments: international (in this case, transatlantic) and domestic. If intl. flights just got more expensive, using the simple supply-demand theory, demand should go down. However, if the domestic airline segment has seen an increase in passengers, it means that the business from domestic segment could be so large that overall, airline companies are doing better. Why are the number of domestic passengers increasing? Because people are now taking vacations to locations within the country? But how does that imply that they have more money? Is this the right answer just because it does NOT weaken the argument?

So I started off assuming E was right...but, when I really started to question it, I ended up eliminating all the options?! Oh man...help!!!

Btw, what's the OA???

Here is how i approached the question -
What is the conclusion ?

Answer - The airlines are doing a booming business

Now, let me share my thoughts on the various choices -

1) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.
Since the airline is really not doing a lot(or booming) of business becuase the tickets are being refunded, hence i would say that this is weakening the conclusion

2) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.
Since there are few airlines and people have money to fly inspite of rising price, the airlines, whaterver number they are, are booming in the business. This strengthen's the conclusion.

3) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.
this does not affect the conclusion becuase we do not know whether people are flying or driving, hence no impact to the conclusion

4) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.
This shows that people have more time which the can afford to spend. Nothing shows that they fly, thus helping the airline to boom. However, this does not show that people have more they, it just shows that they have more time.

5) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers
This says that the dommestic airlines have a steady increase in passenger that might cause a boom in dommestic airline industry. But the conclusion talks about airline industry on the whole not specific to dommestic or international. Hence this "might" strengthen the conclusion if there is an increase in both dommestic and international airline industry, resulting in a boom in overall airline industry. But since we do not know about this fact, i would say this "might" strengthen the conclusion but not to a very strong extent.

Considering all the above facts, i would say B is the correct answer.

Thoughts ??

What is the OA ?

First things first, the question stem is "All of the following, if true, would weaken the argument above EXCEPT", so we dont necessarily have to find an option that strengthens it. One that has no bearing on the argument will do too just as well.

The argument says that more tickets are being sold despite the high prices, therefore people must have a lot of money to spend one vacation. Any option that shows that:
(i) People dont spend money, or
(ii) People dont spend more money on vacation, or
(iii) People have little money but they dont have any other option
will weaken the argument. Lets analyze the statements now.

(A) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.
From this it can be inferred that since someone else is paying the money, people may not necessarily have extra money. Besides, this also tells us that most of the tickets sold are not for vacations. Weakens. Rejected.

(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.
From this it can be inferred that people dont have extra money but they still spend it for the lack of options. Weakens. Rejected.

(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.
From this it can be inferred that people are making up for the increased airfare by cutting costs elsewhere, hence they may not have any extra money. Weakens. Rejected.

(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.
From this it can be inferred that people dont have extra money but they still spend it for they cant afford the time requirements of the other options. Weakens. Rejected.

(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers
This has no bearing on the passage. All other weaken the argument EXCEPT this one.

conclusion: Clearly, people today have more money to spend on vacations than they did five years ago [conclusion].
All of the following, if true, would weaken the argument above EXCEPT (4 will weaken the argument & answer -->1 will not weaken the argument):
A) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.
This means that people do not have moneyto go on vacation --> weakens

(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.
If there are fewer airlines that explains why the prices are so high. They don’t have a choice not because they have money weakens
(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.
If they are taking shorter vacations * cheap hotels, people do not have money--> weakens

(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.
people travel by ships because they don’t have money --> weakens

(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers
E is about domestic. Totally unrelated to transatlantic--> Does not weaken

IMO: E

IMO E

CONCLUSION: people today have more money to spend on vacations than they did five years ago.

FOUR ANSWER CHOICES WILL WEAKEN THIS CONCLUSION===>4 OPTIONS WILL PROVIDE SOMETHING TO BELIEVE THAT people are spending not because they have more moneyTO SPEND ON VACATIONS...but because of some other reasons.

(A)Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.
if all there money is getting refunded==>this means they are not investing from their pocket==>so we cant say that people have more money to spend.hence weakens==>incorrect

(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.==>fewer airlines are there===>supply is less ...demand is more===>it means because people dont have other options thats why they are spending more====>weakens===>incorrect

(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.===>clearly if people are taking shorter vacations..and living in cheaper hotels===>they dont have more money tto spend on vacations====>clearly weakens===>incorrect

(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.===>there is only 2 way to crossing atlantic===>either by ship or by plane===>by ship it is taking so much time that people cant afford to spend===>clearly they have only one option by air...so thats why they are paying more because of their need.==>weakens==incorrect

(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers.===>we are not worried about DOMESTIC AIRLINES==WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT TRANSATLANTIC flights===>this one misses the point===>hence CORRECT.

hope it helps

My choice is E, i think it is the most logical one.

E.

(A) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies. -- Valid option. Disapproves the notion that people have more money.
(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago. -- fewer options available. People are forced to buy.
(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to. -- Weakens the conclusion that people have more money.
(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford. -- More time required by ship and hence they are forced to buy expensive flight tickets - not because they have more money.
(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers -- Nothing to do with the argument.

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.