It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 22:26

### 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

# Products sold under a brand name used to command premium

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2010
Posts: 72

Kudos [?]: 133 [5], given: 4

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 11:45
5
KUDOS
24
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

61% (01:22) correct 39% (01:32) wrong based on 930 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Products sold under a brand name used to command premium prices because, in general, they were superior to nonbrand rival products. Technical expertise in product development has become so widespread, however, that special quality advantages are very hard to obtain these days and even harder to maintain. As a consequence, brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. Paradoxically, brand names are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the paradox outlined above?

(A) Brand names are taken by consumers as a guarantee of getting a product as good as the best rival products.

(B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time.

(C) In many acquisitions of one corporation by another, the acquiring corporation is interested more in acquiring the right to use certain brand names than in acquiring existing production facilities.

(D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to get new brand names established.

(E) The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency, especially when sales are declining.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
I answered D but it is incorrect- D states that it was easier to get brand names established. What it means is that today is it difficult to establish a brand name. I believe that explains the paradox as even though good quality products can be made by any one it is difficult to create a brand name and for those who have created it- they have a marketing edge and that is what the question is asking.Can someone tell me whats wrong with this logic
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 133 [5], given: 4

Intern
Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 13:27
just thinking out loud here...the way i picked up the paradox is "...bigger MARKETING advantage than ever...". The paradox, in my opinion, is stressing on the MARKETING advantage of the brand names. Hence it has to do with the impact of brand names on consumers i.e. how brand names (or lack thereof) impact on consumers help market a product.

hence i'll go with option (B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time. which tells that brand name still holds some value in consumer's thinking even though there is no special quality associated with brand products.

I guess, the problem with option (D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to get new brand names established is that it talks about the difficulty of creating a brand in modern (today's) world but doesn't relate it to its MARKETING impact.

My 2 cents. Do let me know the correct choice though!

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 1

Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2012
Posts: 18

Kudos [?]: 9 [4], given: 22

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Dec 2012, 21:22
4
KUDOS
The OA is A.

I chose B initially. But after reviewing the Q and A, here is why I think the answer is A:

The paradox is is why do brands have an advantage over non-brands, considering that manufacturing and quality is relatively the same across the industry. Brands should not have an advantage, but they still do. Why?

So there must be something else that is driving the use of marketing among brands.

Possible considerations-Maybe the consumer responds prefers brand that guarantee performance? Or maybe the marketing advantage that firms have provides those firms with the ability to differntiate themselves from their competition?

A addresses the use of marketing, whereas B describes the behavior of consumers. If you think about it, B makes the problem worse-if the consumer already thinks that the non-brand will degrade over time, then what is the difference between now and before the new manufacturing techniques were employed? This seems to indicate that the firm has alwayes had a marketing advantage, and it does not explain why there may be a greater advantage right now.

Those are my thoughts anyway...

A is by no means a sexy answer but, at least is explains why the brands have a greater marketing advantage despite less differentiation among the products.

Kudos [?]: 9 [4], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 29 Dec 2012
Posts: 54

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 6

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2013, 07:25

For me the paradox is that even though the quality of the product is no longer different the Brand still gives now a BETTER competitive advantage. Choice D answers this paradox by saying that, yes the quality is no longer different but this makes now Brand even harder to enter the market and get renowned thus giving the installed brand an even more competitive advantage.

Answer A does not really answer the paradox that Brand now are even more important than before because the argument in A was already true before.

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 6

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 334

Kudos [?]: 421 [1], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2013, 07:46
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi Jack,

Let me see if I can explain.

The question simply is:
Branded Products are the same price and quality as non-branded.
BUT
Branded products are at a bigger marketing advantage than ever.
WHY?

To put D in easy to understand language, it is saying: It is now harder to get a brand name established.

This does not say anything about why branded products, whilst they are the same quality and price are still selected. It simply says that it's harder to create a brand - this is slightly different, it would suggest that branded products are more secure in their superior position (harder to get a rival brand set up), but does not say WHY they are in a superior position.

Does that help
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 421 [1], given: 4

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2311

Kudos [?]: 9038 [6], given: 335

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2013, 19:55
6
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
zest4mba wrote:
Products sold under a brand name used to command premium prices because, in general, they were superior to
nonbrand rival products. Technical expertise in product development has become so widespread, however, that
special quality advantages are very hard to obtain these days and even harder to maintain. As a consequence,
brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. Paradoxically, brand names
are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the paradox outlined above?

(A) Brand names are taken by consumers as a guarantee of getting a product as good as the best rival
products.
(B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time.
(C) In many acquisitions of one corporation by another, the acquiring corporation is interested more in
acquiring the right to use certain brand names than in acquiring existing production facilities.
(D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to
get new brand names established.
(E) The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency,
especially when sales are declining.

I answered D but it is incorrect- D states that it was easier to get brand names established. What it means is that today is it difficult to establish a brand name. I believe that explains the paradox as even though good quality products can be made by any one it is difficult to create a brand name and for those who have created it- they have a marketing edge and that is what the question is asking.Can someone tell me whats wrong with this logic

This question is quite interesting and difficult at the same time. The problem some of us have encountered in selecting option D is that we have used our common but outside knowledge. The knowledge is that a branded product has an advantage over a non-branded product. But the main question relevant to this passage is how? How does a branded product has an advantage over a non-branded product?

Think like a Company

Before answering this "how", please understand that we are thinking of this advantage in terms of the company because the last line clearly says that "brand names are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.". This marketing advantage cannot be used for the consumers, it is for the company who owns the product.

So, how does a branded product has an advantage over a non-branded product? There could be only two factors: higher price or higher sales. In other words, the product could generate greater profits per unit or sell more units. In either way, the company would be at an advantage.

In our current case, it is given that the product doesn't sell at a higher price but still it given a marketing advantage. So, now the other way of giving advantage is through increased sales.

So, if an option statement suggests that people will buy branded products more than unbranded products, that would resolve the paradox - The paradox is that even though the branded products don't offer higher price, they are still a marketing advantage

Guaranteed Quality at the same price

Now, as we go through the options, we see that option A provides a very valid reason to suggest that branded products will sell more than unbranded products. Why? Because at the same price, you are getting a guarantee of quality if you buy a branded product.

Therefore, option A is the correct choice.

However, let's also look at option D.

This basically says that brand names are difficult to get established now. But it doesn't say that how these brand names are a marketing advantage even though they don't allow us to charge higher. Here, some of us have used our common knowledge that brand names are an advantage in all situations. But we can't use this common knowledge here.

Hope this helps

Feel free to ask in case of further queries.

-Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Kudos [?]: 9038 [6], given: 335

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 412

Kudos [?]: 342 [1], given: 34

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 10:38
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
nverma wrote:
Products sold under a brand name used to command premium prices because, in general, they were superior to
nonbrand rival products. Technical expertise in product development has become so widespread, however, that
special quality advantages are very hard to obtain these days and even harder to maintain. As a consequence,
brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. Paradoxically, brand names
are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the paradox outlined above?

(A) Brand names are taken by consumers as a guarantee of getting a product as good as the best rival
products. >>>>[b]Correct[/b]
(B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time. >>>>Does not resolve the paradox.
(C) In many acquisitions of one corporation by another, the acquiring corporation is interested more in
acquiring the right to use certain brand names than in acquiring existing production facilities.>>>>Does not resolve the paradox.
(D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to
get new brand names established. >>>>If its easy to get a brand name, then anyone can have a brand name, and then having a brand name is not an advantage.
(E) The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency,
especially when sales are declining.>>>>Does not resolve the paradox.

I answered D but it is incorrect- D states that it was easier to get brand names established. What it means is that today is it difficult to establish a brand name. I believe that explains the paradox as even though good quality products can be made by any one it is difficult to create a brand name and for those who have created it- they have a marketing edge and that is what the question is asking.Can someone tell me whats wrong with this logic
Guys, I seriously need some help on this one. What is wrong with B? If quality of invariant brand names is expected to fade in some time, having a brand name definitely helps.
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Kudos [?]: 342 [1], given: 34

Math Forum Moderator
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 3003

Kudos [?]: 1087 [0], given: 325

Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 11:06
zest4mba wrote:
Products sold under a brand name used to command premium prices because, in general, they were superior to
nonbrand rival products. Technical expertise in product development has become so widespread, however, that
special quality advantages are very hard to obtain these days and even harder to maintain. As a consequence,
brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. Paradoxically, brand names
are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Earlier - Branded Products , were priced at a premium due to perceived superiority to Non Branded Products.

Now - Techncical Expertise has narrowed the gap between branded and Non Branded Products , reducing the product differences.

Concl - Branded Products neither produce higher Quality nor are priced at a premium.

Paradox - Branded Products are bigger marketing tool....

If there is no difference in terms of Product quality , advantages and other aspects between Branded and Non Branded Products then how come Branded Products offer better Marketing Tool....

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the paradox outlined above?

(A) Brand names are taken by consumers as a guarantee of getting a product as good as the best rival
products.

Seems good - We buy Branded goods with the expectation of Quality...

Consider Apple MAC book to Say XYZ Brand...

Even if Technology someday bridges the gap between Apple and XYZ , we would still prefer Apple Product with the gurantee of a good Brand name in terms of Quality and reputation won over time...

(B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time.

Not as good as (A)

(C) In many acquisitions of one corporation by another, the acquiring corporation is interested more in acquiring the right to use certain brand names than in acquiring existing production facilities.

Out of scope and wordy...

(D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to get new brand names established.

We are trying to resolve the Paradox , and this statement is no way helpful in doing so...

(E) The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency, especially when sales are declining.

Out of scope...

Hence IMO (A) looks the best..
_________________

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )

Kudos [?]: 1087 [0], given: 325

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 334

Kudos [?]: 421 [0], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 11:22
joshnsit wrote:
Guys, I seriously need some help on this one. What is wrong with B? If quality of invariant brand names is expected to fade in some time, having a brand name definitely helps.

Hi Josh,

The issue with B, is that it actually goes against what is said in the passage, where it is stated that now non-brand names have come up to the same standard.

So whilst B does give a reason for people choosing branded, it does not over come the paradox, rather stating a different point of view to the author.
James
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 421 [0], given: 4

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 412

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 12:00
plumber250 wrote:
joshnsit wrote:
Guys, I seriously need some help on this one. What is wrong with B? If quality of invariant brand names is expected to fade in some time, having a brand name definitely helps.
Hi Josh
The issue with B, is that it actually goes against what is said in the passage, where it is stated that now non-brand names have come up to the same standard.

So whilst B does give a reason for people choosing branded, it does not over come the paradox, rather stating a different point of view to the author.
James
James, Bingo.. I also thought of this exact line of reasoning but I have 2 reservations in accepting this:
1) I believe that we can definitely bring fresh information in the paradox answer choices, just as we can bring additional information in Strengthen/Weakening answers. So having a new information which can go against one of the facts seems fine to me.
2) The bigger issue is that the information brought by B is from the perspective of non-branded products, so B doesn't refer to or go directly against branded products as in the stimulus. This means I am not directly going against of what I said in stimulus by saying B. Please note that conclusion of argument is: brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices.

Just another observation, A is a perception(from past) and B is also a perception(of future). I couldn't find any way to find A better.

Any suggestions, where I could have gone wrong in assessing this.. Thanks for responding
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 334

Kudos [?]: 421 [1], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 12:11
1
KUDOS
Hi Josh,

I'm afraid I disagree with your assumption that contradicting the passage can help with paradoxes, at least in this case.

The paradox is that: branded/unbranded are the same and the same price. Yet the brands have an advantage.

You need something to resolve that tension, by giving a 3rd bit of info. Simply saying you don't agree with one or other is not actually resolving the paradox, just saying you disagree with it.

James
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 421 [1], given: 4

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 412

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2014, 14:49
plumber250 wrote:
Hi Josh,
I'm afraid I disagree with your assumption that contradicting the passage can help with paradoxes, at least in this case.

The paradox is that: branded/unbranded are the same and the same price. Yet the brands have an advantage.

You need something to resolve that tension, by giving a 3rd bit of info. Simply saying you don't agree with one or other is not actually resolving the paradox, just saying you disagree with it.

James
Thanks James, I think I understand your point, it makes sense and we all are here to learn. I will keep this rule/learning/observation in mind till I observe a deviation.
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Kudos [?]: 342 [0], given: 34

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10119

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2017, 10:55
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.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 96

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 584

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 May 2017, 08:01
Can anyone please explain to me why E is incorrect?

Thanks!

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 584

Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 167

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 141

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Copenhagen, ESMT"19
GPA: 3.75
WE: Consulting (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2017, 00:29
Paradox :brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. However, brand names are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Option E The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency, especially when sales are declining.
When Sales are declining company hires new marketing agency in order to revive sales decline . This doesn't help to resolve paradox .

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 141

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 254

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 1

Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Investment Banking (Venture Capital)
Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2017, 19:51
Products sold under a brand name used to command premium prices because, in general, they were superior to nonbrand rival products. Technical expertise in product development has become so widespread, however, that special quality advantages are very hard to obtain these days and even harder to maintain. As a consequence, brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices. Paradoxically, brand names are a bigger marketing advantage than ever.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the paradox outlined above?

This is how I understood it:

CONCLUSION: "brand-name products generally neither offer higher quality nor sell at higher prices"; HOWEVER, "brand names are a bigger marketing advantage than ever."

- How could this be correct?

(A) Brand names are taken by consumers as a guarantee of getting a product as good as the best rival products.
- Consumers are seeing brand names as KNOWN QUANTITIES. Have you ever heard of the expression "I'd rather go with/choose the KNOWN devil over the UNKNOWN devil?"
(B) Consumers recognize that the quality of products sold under invariant brand names can drift over time.
- Over time = irrelevant, we are talking about now.
(C) In many acquisitions of one corporation by another, the acquiring corporation is interested more in acquiring the right to use certain brand names than in acquiring existing production facilities.
- Acquisitions = out of scope. Who cares?
(D) In the days when special quality advantages were easier to obtain than they are now, it was also easier to get new brand names established.
- Out of scope. Who cares how easy it was to get brand names established?
(E) The advertising of a company’s brand-name products is at times transferred to a new advertising agency, especially when sales are declining.
- Why do we care about advertising agencies? they may not even do a good job in the first place...

So I obviously chose "A". Please offer kudos if you find this helpful

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 1

Re: Products sold under a brand name used to command premium   [#permalink] 30 Aug 2017, 19:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by