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

It is currently 15 Sep 2019, 21:33

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58008
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Apr 2019, 03:48
3
2
65
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

53% (01:58) correct 47% (02:07) wrong based on 1611 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?

A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.

CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION

Argument Construction

Situation
Pirated DVDs of films are released earlier than the film's official DVD release day. They are also sold more cheaply. These practices cut into the revenue expected from a film's official DVD sales. According to Ramirez, the prevalence of piracy indicates that consumers want lower prices and earlier release. He concludes that if the official DVDs were sold more cheaply and released earlier, the impact of piracy on film industry profits might be reduced.

Reasoning
What must Ramirez assume for his argument to be logically correct? Suppose none of the current purchasers of pirated film DVDs were to purchase the official DVDs even if these were released earlier and at a significantly lower price. If that were to occur, then the measures Ramirez suggests would not mitigate piracy.

(A) This does not have to be assumed for Ramirez's reasoning to be logically good. Earlier release of the official DVDs at a lower price could somewhat reduce revenue from movie theater showings of the films. But if the revenue from official DVDs released earlier and priced lower were greatly boosted through greatly increased official DVD sales, overall revenue for each film could be higher than would be the case with widespread piracy.

(B) Correct. If all existing purchasers of pirated film DVDs continued to purchase such DVDs even after implementation of the changes Ramirez advocates, then the changes would not mitigate the destructive consequences of piracy. Thus, Ramirez's reasoning must assume that the changes he recommends would cause at least some former purchasers of pirated DVDs to begin purchasing the official DVDs.

(C) This might improve profits provided revenue did not also decline. Ramirez's argument does not depend on the assumption that the cost of producing DVDs will decline. His reasoning assumes that total sales volume for official DVDs would increase if piracy were reduced.

(D) Ideally this would occur with the change Ramirez recommends, but it does not have to be assumed for his reasoning to be logically good. For example, the result Ramirez predicts could occur if all existing sellers of pirated DVDs continued to sell them but sold fewer.

(E) This is likely true but is not an assumption that Ramirez needs to make for his reasoning to be logically good. Even if some DVDs sold by DVD sellers were pirated without the sellers being aware of it, e.g., if they purchased them from a fraudulent wholesaler, the fact that the pirated DVDs are sold more cheaply and before the release of the official DVD would reduce the filmmakers’ total revenue.

_________________
Most Helpful Expert Reply
examPAL Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Posts: 1078
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2019, 03:00
5
Bunuel wrote:
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?

A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.

CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION


The argument is that releasing cheaper DVDs faster will reduce the damage of the pirated DVDs on profit. This assumes that people buy pirated DVDs because they are cheap and quickly available, and not for other reasons. Since we know what to look for, we can skim over the answers, ignoring everything that is irrelevant. This is a Precise approach.

Going over our options, (B) directly addresses this issue and is our answer.
_________________
Most Helpful Community Reply
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 409
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2019, 10:11
47
Top Contributor
18
VidhyaN wrote:
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja


Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):

1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.

2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.

3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.

Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:

Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any cause some reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.

At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.

With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:

Some No people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.

That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:

1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.

2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.

3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews
General Discussion
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2385
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2019, 08:16
4
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

Type- assumptions
Boil it down- Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.- incorrect, we are concerned about the overall film industry profits and not just the profits from films' theatrical release. Also, this statement talks about the revenue from the theatrical release and not the profits.
The film industry profit can still increase with a decrease in revenue from theatrical release (provided the other profits such as from sales of DVD increase)
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.- Correct, if we negate this statement, then the argument falls apart
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.- irrelevant, whether the industry can product DVDs more cheaply than now is not relevant
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.- irrelevant
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.- irrelevant

Answer B
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
D
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Posts: 4725
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
Schools: INSEAD, HEC '22, IIM
GPA: 4
WE: Marketing (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2019, 11:55
conclusion ; Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

I actually went with option D ; as its negation ; Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would not likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower. which i think breaks the conclusion

whereas in option B ; Somepeople who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would not be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
the use of word some made me think that majority of population is not listed , had word most used instead of some then B should have been correct... whereas this is not the case ...
DavidTutorexamPAL please review and share your opinion on why B is correct over D?


Bunuel wrote:
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?

A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.

CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION

_________________
If you liked my solution then please give Kudos. Kudos encourage active discussions.
examPAL Representative
User avatar
P
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Posts: 1078
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Apr 2019, 12:08
Archit3110 wrote:
conclusion ; Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

I actually went with option D ; as its negation ; Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would not likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower. which i think breaks the conclusion

whereas in option B ; Somepeople who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would not be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
the use of word some made me think that majority of population is not listed , had word most used instead of some then B should have been correct... whereas this is not the case ...
DavidTutorexamPAL please review and share your opinion on why B is correct over D?


Hey Archit3110,
The main issue is that (D) talks about the *sellers* and not the *buyers*. What hurts revenue isn't people (trying to ) sell pirated DVDs, but rather people buying them (and not the originals). Put differently, as far as the media companies are concerned, so long as people purchase the original DVD the pirate-DVD businesses can do whatever they like.

Does this help?
_________________
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
D
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Posts: 4725
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
Schools: INSEAD, HEC '22, IIM
GPA: 4
WE: Marketing (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2019, 00:20
DavidTutorexamPAL ; i totally agree with your logic here... thanks. :)

DavidTutorexamPAL wrote:
Archit3110 wrote:
conclusion ; Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

I actually went with option D ; as its negation ; Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would not likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower. which i think breaks the conclusion

whereas in option B ; Somepeople who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would not be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
the use of word some made me think that majority of population is not listed , had word most used instead of some then B should have been correct... whereas this is not the case ...
DavidTutorexamPAL please review and share your opinion on why B is correct over D?


Hey Archit3110,
The main issue is that (D) talks about the *sellers* and not the *buyers*. What hurts revenue isn't people (trying to ) sell pirated DVDs, but rather people buying them (and not the originals). Put differently, as far as the media companies are concerned, so long as people purchase the original DVD the pirate-DVD businesses can do whatever they like.

Does this help?

_________________
If you liked my solution then please give Kudos. Kudos encourage active discussions.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 6
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2019, 08:01
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 314
CAT Tests
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2019, 15:42
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
VidhyaN wrote:
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja


Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):

1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.

2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.

3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.

Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:

Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any cause some reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.

At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.

With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:

Some No people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.

That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:

1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.

2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.

3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.


Hi,

If we were to negate option B like the following, "Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would NOT be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now", would this be incorrect? I negated option B like this and founded the conclusion to still hold because even if some people choose not to purchase legitimate DVDs and most did, the conclusion would still hold regarding the industry's profits. Could you please help explain where I am making a mistake? Would greatly appreciate it!
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 409
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Apr 2019, 08:59
6
Top Contributor
7
[quote="J

Hi,

If we were to negate option B like the following, "Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would NOT be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now", would this be incorrect? I negated option B like this and founded the conclusion to still hold because even if some people choose not to purchase legitimate DVDs and most did, the conclusion would still hold regarding the industry's profits. Could you please help explain where I am making a mistake? Would greatly appreciate it![/quote]

Yeah, really good question. I've always looked at Assumption Negation this way:

1) If you have a qualifier like "some," "not all," "all," "none," "only," etc. as part of the subject of an answer choice, negate that.

For example: "Some people would buy DVDs" --> "No people would buy DVDs"

2) If you don't have that, negate the primary verb in the sentence.

For example "People would buy DVDs if they were cheaper" --> "People would not buy DVDs if they were cheaper"

3) If you're unsure, try a few option of where you negate and if you do find one that cripples the conclusion, that's a good answer to keep around. If that happens on multiple choices, then go back to the argument and try to really understand the flaw now that you've seen some potential weaknesses.

#1 is important though, because think of what happens if you negate the verb in "some people would buy DVDs":

"Some people would buy DVDs" --> "Some people would not buy DVDs"

Those two almost exactly same the same thing ("some would" doesn't *always* mean "some wouldn't" but usually it does). So you're not really negating the statement there: you're essentially just reinforcing it. That's why it's so important to go after the some/all/none qualifier: that's where the real negation happens if you have one of those qualifiers in the subject.
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 22 Sep 2016
Posts: 46
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q44 V39
Reviews Badge
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2019, 04:33
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
VidhyaN wrote:
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja


Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):

1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.

2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.

3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.

Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:

Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any cause some reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.

At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.

With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:

Some No people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.

That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:

1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.

2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.

3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.


Brian,

Would option A be correct, if it were to say "significant reduction in the revenue"?
_________________
Best,
Spiritual Yoda
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 409
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2019, 05:37
1
Top Contributor
SpiritualYoda wrote:
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
VidhyaN wrote:
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja


Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):

1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.

2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.

3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.

Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:

Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any cause some reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.

At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.

With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:

Some No people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.

That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:

1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.

2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.

3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.


Brian,

Would option A be correct, if it were to say "significant reduction in the revenue"?


Yes, yeah I'd say so. Because if you negate it it would say that releasing DVDs early "would cause a significant reduction in theatrical revenue" which then throws the whole plan in to question - are they really bettering film industry profits overall if they're giving up quite a bit of theater revenue in favor of DVD revenue?

So great point...the argument definitely assumes that whatever they make back in DVD revenue isn't given up in another way that counts toward the conclusion's broader "film industry profits." Nice work!
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Posts: 123
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 May 2019, 12:15
1
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
VidhyaN wrote:
@Experts :

Can you please on why option B is correct and why not option A.

B option says that " Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs ......." .

In this case, out of 10 people , 9 could have preferred pirated DVDs and 1 could have preferred Legit DVDs

Even in this case , the plan of mitigating the piracy's negative effect on profits would not work .


daagh GMATNinja


Really good question that kind of strikes at the heart of what makes Assumption questions so interesting (and difficult). With assumptions (and I'll demonstrate why in a second):

1) It's really, really rare that extreme/universal words like all, only, never, etc. are required assumptions.

2) The correct answer / required assumption is usually much more subtle than what a great Strengthen answer would be, so you have to treat Assumption questions differently.

3) This is where the Assumption Negation Technique can be so useful in helping show why points 1 and 2 are so important.

Here notice that choice (A) has that extreme/universal language "would not cause any reduction" in revenue from theatrical release. Say that that were not true, and there were at least *some* reduction in the theatrical revenue. A negated choice (A) would read:

Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any cause some reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.

At this point we don't know whether the decrease in theatrical revenue is offset or overcome by an increase in the DVD revenue they're trying to recoup with this plan. We can't tell whether a negated (A) helps or hurts the conclusion, meaning that it's not a necessary assumption. A small decrease in theatrical revenue overcome by a massive increase in DVD revenue means that the plan still works; a massive decrease in theatrical revenue and a marginal increase in DVD revenue means that it didn't work at all. We just don't know.

With (B), the opposite of "some people who would otherwise purchase..." is "no people who would otherwise purchase." So a negated (B) is:

Some No people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

Well here if no one is going to buy the DVDs under the new plan, the plan is a complete and total flop: it does absolutely nothing because no one is participating. So a negated (B) absolutely cripples the argument. And that shows why (B) is a necessary assumption of the argument: without it, the argument is worthless.

That's why Assumption Negation is so powerful: by considering the opposite of an answer choice, you get to:

1) Determine whether you really need that assumption or not. If without it you know for sure the argument is powerfully damaged, then that assumption was required (like with B). If without it you can't really tell whether the argument still works or not, it wasn't essential to the argument in the first place.

2) Turn fairly "soft" Assumption answers (like "some people..." in B) into powerful Weaken answers. Assumptions are really easy to make...correct answers don't often jump off the screen to you as "oh yeah that one is absolutely right." But good Weaken answers often *do* jump off the screen. Assumption Negation allows you to turn hard Assumption questions into easy/moderate Weaken questions.

3) See why extreme/universal words like "all" or "none" are so infrequently required by an argument. The opposite of "all" is "not all," and even if not all, but most, people behave a certain way, the argument tends to still work. But the opposite of "some" is "none" and as you can see with (B) if you turn "some people" to "no one" an argument can crumble really quickly. All/none are great Strengthen/Weaken words but not great Assumption words, since you rarely ever need such extremes as required information for an argument to hold up.



Really awesome explanation Brian. Thanks a lot!
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Posts: 123
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2019, 18:07
The opposite of "some" is "none" and the opposite of "all" is "not all" - Is there a list of opposites of words like these?
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 409
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2019, 20:29
1
Top Contributor
rnn wrote:
The opposite of "some" is "none" and the opposite of "all" is "not all" - Is there a list of opposites of words like these?


Yes! It's a concept called "logical opposites" (as opposed to polar opposites like all/none, always/never). Logical opposites are essentially just saying "anything but that" - think of what will make the total field add up to 100% of total possibilities.

So with "all" that means every single one of a set. The logical opposite is "not all" because it's really "every possibility but all." And "all" + "not all" adds up to every possible outcome.

"Some" really means "anything but none" so "some" and "none" are logical opposites and "some" + "none" accounts for all total possibilities.

This list isn't comprehensive but it's a good start:

Some + None
All + Not All
Always + Not Always
Never + Sometimes
Only + Not Only

And really the technique is to just say "NOT _______ (the word you just read)?" and that will give you the logical opposite.
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 22 Sep 2016
Posts: 46
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q44 V39
Reviews Badge
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 May 2019, 22:29
1
rnn wrote:
The opposite of "some" is "none" and the opposite of "all" is "not all" - Is there a list of opposites of words like these?


Although Brian has answered succinctly, you can refer to https://gmatclub.com/forum/learn-how-to ... 99347.html for more details on this topic.
_________________
Best,
Spiritual Yoda
VP
VP
User avatar
P
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Posts: 1007
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: LBS '22
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 May 2019, 19:13
Pre-thinking leads to a strong result on this question.

Conclusion: "Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits."

Consider this

Ramierz assumes the motives behind pirating. He thinks people pirate because they want "cheaper" movies, quicker.

However, Ramierz has produced 2 reasons behind pirating. Here are a few other reason:
- convenience - perhaps people don't want to download
- pirating is free - $0 is paid
- comfort - people may not want to leave their homes and they can watch pirated content at home

Although answer choice (A) is clearly a runner up as it suggests a counter - that producing DVDs sooner and cheaper would potentially lower profits - it was not assumed in making the argument.

(B) was directly assumed by Ramierz otherwise there is no point at all in endeavouring down the path to produce DVDs sooner and cheaper.
_________________
Goal: Q49, V41

+1 Kudos if you like my post pls!
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1690
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
Schools: INSEAD Jan '19
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Reviews Badge
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 11:13
Bunuel wrote:
Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually cheaper than legitimate DVDs and become available well before a film's official DVD release date, adversely affect its bottom line. But the industry should note what the spread of piracy indicates: consumers want lower prices and faster DVD releases. Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?

A. Releasing legitimate DVDs earlier would not cause any reduction in the revenue the film industry receives from the films' theatrical release.
B. Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.
C. The film industry will in the future be able to produce DVDs more cheaply than is currently the case.
D. Some current sellers of pirated DVDs would likely discontinue their businesses if legitimate DVDs were released faster and priced lower.
E. Current purchasers of pirated DVDs are aware that those DVDs are not authorized by the film industry.

CR53631.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION


AjiteshArun :

I eliminated option B because I thought if only some people are willing to buy legitimate DVDs, it will not affect the plan too much. Because if rest of the people are willing to buy pirated DVDs, the plan will fail and this can not be an assumption.

The tricky part of this choice is when I read it as straight, it seems not a good option, but when I negate it seems great.

Please help, how only some people's willingness can be considered a good assumption.
_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 3031
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 20:47
2
AkshdeepS wrote:
AjiteshArun :

I eliminated option B because I thought if only some people are willing to buy legitimate DVDs, it will not affect the plan too much. Because if rest of the people are willing to buy pirated DVDs, the plan will fail and this can not be an assumption.

The tricky part of this choice is when I read it as straight, it seems not a good option, but when I negate it seems great.

Please help, how only some people's willingness can be considered a good assumption.
Hi AkshdeepS,

This is the conclusion:
Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

Here by mitigate, Ramirez means that the negative effect of piracy on profits would be reduced if the strategy were implemented. However, we must not try to put a number to just how much the negative effect would be reduced by. That is, we should not worry about just how much of a positive impact this strategy is likely to have on profits. We're okay with this strategy as long as we get a positive (non-zero) contribution to profits. So, even an extra $0.01 is enough for us, because, technically, any positive impact on profits will strengthen what Ramirez is saying.

Option B says:
Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

In logic, we should think of the word some as "more than zero". That is, by some, we could even mean all. This is why you find the negation of option B so convincing. The opposite of some is not "extremely few". It is "none". So if none of the people who purchase pirated DVDs are willing to purchase legitimate DVDs after the strategy is implemented, the strategy won't work (the strategy will not reduce the negative effect of piracy on profits). If some of them are willing to purchase legitimate DVDs instead of pirated DVDs, then the negative effect of piracy on profits will be reduced (though we don't know by how much).
_________________
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1690
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
Schools: INSEAD Jan '19
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Reviews Badge
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 21:58
1
AjiteshArun wrote:
AkshdeepS wrote:
AjiteshArun :

I eliminated option B because I thought if only some people are willing to buy legitimate DVDs, it will not affect the plan too much. Because if rest of the people are willing to buy pirated DVDs, the plan will fail and this can not be an assumption.

The tricky part of this choice is when I read it as straight, it seems not a good option, but when I negate it seems great.

Please help, how only some people's willingness can be considered a good assumption.
Hi AkshdeepS,

This is the conclusion:
Lowering prices of DVDs and releasing them sooner would mitigate piracy's negative effect on film industry profits.

Here by mitigate, Ramirez means that the negative effect of piracy on profits would be reduced if the strategy were implemented. However, we must not try to put a number to just how much the negative effect would be reduced by. That is, we should not worry about just how much of a positive impact this strategy is likely to have on profits. We're okay with this strategy as long as we get a positive (non-zero) contribution to profits. So, even an extra $0.01 is enough for us, because, technically, any positive impact on profits will strengthen what Ramirez is saying.

Option B says:
Some people who would otherwise purchase pirated DVDs would be willing to purchase legitimate DVDs if they were less expensive and released earlier than they are now.

In logic, we should think of the word some as "more than zero". That is, by some, we could even mean all. This is why you find the negation of option B so convincing. The opposite of some is not "extremely few". It is "none". So if none of the people who purchase pirated DVDs are willing to purchase legitimate DVDs after the strategy is implemented, the strategy won't work (the strategy will not reduce the negative effect of piracy on profits). If some of them are willing to purchase legitimate DVDs instead of pirated DVDs, then the negative effect of piracy on profits will be reduced (though we don't know by how much).


Yes, your explanation is spot on. That's why official questions are so good that they can deceive us so convincingly without using so called "difficult language".

Thanks for help. :)
_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually   [#permalink] 05 Jun 2019, 21:58

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Ramirez: The film industry claims that pirated DVDs, which are usually

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne