GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 14 Nov 2018, 05:43

### 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 November
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
28293031123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829301
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### \$450 Tuition Credit & Official CAT Packs FREE

November 15, 2018

November 15, 2018

10:00 PM MST

11:00 PM MST

EMPOWERgmat is giving away the complete Official GMAT Exam Pack collection worth \$100 with the 3 Month Pack (\$299)
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

November 17, 2018

November 17, 2018

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Nov. 17, 7 AM PST. Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 06 Apr 2016
Posts: 8

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2018, 12:11
“Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of
the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company
expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle
bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.”

The above argument claims that commuter traffic of the new subway train has exceeded the transit company’s projections and commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. And also expects commuters to ride shuttle buses to subway rather than drive which can have the company to reduce the bus fare and increase the parking fee. There is no substantial evidence to any of the statements that author has made and hence the whole argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, argument mentions that commuter use of new train is exceeding the company’s projections, but there is no data mentioned anywhere in the argument about the projections. There are several factors to be considered to make this statement much more weighted. Argument should have mentioned in which area the use is exceeding and during which hours of the day and is it all the seven days of the week. It is also mentioned that usage of shuttle buses is below the projected use and same analytical assessment has to be done on are all the routes considered , are the timings considered for only peak work hours or 24/7 timing. Transit Companies can't make the statements by considering one area or certain hours in a day to make assessment about demand and supply situation. By having answers to these questions will be giving the argument a substantial evidence of Transit company’s projections.
Secondly, argument states that if transit company expects the commuters to ride shuttle buses to subway stations rather than driving it must reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the parking rates. Assumptions should not be the only evidence for companies to anticipate the forecasting. Proper statistical data has to be gathered to make the future forecastings. Argument doesnt give any data regarding current prices for shuttle service and parking for commuters and by how much percent would they increase or decrease the price? Are the current prices on par with the market transportation rates , will the new prices be high and lead to the inflation to the commuters who use those parking spaces. There is no agreement between transit company and commuters that they should only use their parking spaces , so commuters can also use nearby parking spaces which might cost them lower than the transit company prices. There is no discussion about competitive pricing for the parking spaces and special discounts. All these above points will give concrete evidence to the statements made by the author.
The argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It would considerably strengthen if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits and demerits of a certain situation it is essential to have full data to support the discussion. In this particular case there was no data about any particular area author was talking about in regards of transit system exceeding the occupancy limit and also usage of shuttle service. Apart from that there is no competitive pricing or current pricing system about the tickets for shuttle service and parking spaces related fee. Without all these data argument remains refuted and open to debate.
Manager
Joined: 02 Apr 2018
Posts: 50

### Show Tags

11 Sep 2018, 16:11
your argument looks pretty solid. There are a few punctual errors though.
Display posts from previous: Sort by