Restaurant Chain Manager: Recently, we changed

Is E out because it doesnt talk about the conclusion ??

A is out, because it talks about cost.

B weakens the argument.

C doesnt address the conclusion.

D reiterating the conclusion, they are able to store the food for long, allowing them to sell the food.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Argument says that as a result of change, less unsold food will be thrown without. So correct option must tell the reason or evidence for the same. As argument doesn't depend on cost, any option based on cost will be incorrect. Same goes with taste of food.


(A) The cost of the refrigerator system will not outweigh the cost of the food spoilage.

WRONG: this tells only about cost while the argument is independent of cost.

(B) The restaurant has not had an increase in sales since the refrigerator system was put in place.

WRONG: increase in sales doesn't imply that there will be less unsold food to keep in store.


(C) Some of the restaurants in the chain still use the old refrigeration system.

WRONG: Irrelevant. What some restaurants do doesn't affect ours

(D) Any food in the old refrigeration system would have been sold eventually as long as it had not spoiled.

CORRECT: food in old store was sold only if it was not spoiled, it won't be sold if it is spoiled and thus will be thrown. But this store will keep it for more time and thus it will be sold before it spoils.


(E) The new refrigeration system has no effect on the taste of the food.

WRONG: argument is independent of Taste of food.


Thus D is the correct answer.


Posted from my mobile device

Conclusion: Therefore, moving forward, less food will have to be thrown away without being sold.

Premise: Recently, we changed the refrigeration system in many of our stores to one that allows us to keep food longer without spoilage.

Assumption: The only reason that the food was not sold was because it had spoiled.

The question stem asks for the answer choice that would most strongly support the argument, so this is a strengthen question. The argument begins by stating that now the restaurants can keep food longer without spoilage. The conclusion that less food will have to be thrown away without being sold introduces the new idea that the food is not sold. When information appears in the conclusion that is not in the premise, the assumption is that the new information is relevant. Since this is a strengthen question, the correct answer will indicate that the only reason that food didn’t sell was that it had to be thrown out because it had spoiled. Evaluate the answer choices, looking for one that reflects this idea.

Choice A: No. The cost is out of scope. The costs to the restaurant chain do not affect whether the food will sell.

Choice B: No. This answer choice weakens the argument. No increase in sales is an indication that there is not more food being sold.

Choice C: No. Some of the restaurants is out of scope. This answer choice is just a restatement of the premise that the restaurant chain has changed the refrigeration system in many of our stores.

Choice D: Correct. If it is true that any food in the old refrigeration system would have been sold eventually as long as it had not spoiled, it stands to reason that more food will be sold now that the food can be kept longer without spoilage.

Choice E: No. The taste of the food is out of scope. The argument is about whether the food has to be thrown away without being sold because it has spoiled, not about how the food tastes.

Disclaimer: I do not like this question so much!

Having said that option D just says that there is sufficient demand for the restaurant food. Hence if the food is not spoilt then the food will be sold! Hence option D is the correct answer.
_________________

can someone explain why E cannot be the answer? strengthening questions require additional information to support conclusion. We are talking about new refrigeration system, food spoilage and sale of food. E furthers strengthens that new refg sysm wont effect the taste of food and hence no effect on sales. D talks about old refg sysm..?

It's a Strengthen Q(if true).... so we can't say that anything is out of Scope.

Now, if we look at 'E' and negate it ... that means New ref. is impacting the Taste of the food which might lead to less food being sold ultimately even if it can be stored for long without spoilage. 'E' is eliminating a clear weakener, thus Strengthening the argument.

Though 'D' is also Strengthening.... I'm not sure if these are legit options.

Anyone, correct me if I'm wrong here.

Terrible question... E actually strengthens the argument. If the refrigerator has an effect on food, then the food might not be sold and the conclusion falls apart.

Having said that, D strengthens the argument too. That's why this is a bad question.

VeritasKarishma GMATNinja VeritasPrepBrian

Restaurant Chain Manager: Recently, we changed the refrigeration system in many of our stores to one that allows us to keep food longer without spoilage. Therefore, moving forward, less food will have to be thrown away without being sold.

Which of the following, if true, would most strongly support the manager’s prediction?

(A) The cost of the refrigerator system will not outweigh the cost of the food spoilage.
Here argument doesn't say anything about cost.

(B) The restaurant has not had an increase in sales since the refrigerator system was put in place.
Opposite. Nothing to do with strengthning the argument.

(C) Some of the restaurants in the chain still use the old refrigeration system.
Not relevant

(D) Any food in the old refrigeration system would have been sold eventually as long as it had not spoiled.
In line with manager's reasoning. earlier also they were store the food in refrigeration system

(E) The new refrigeration system has no effect on the taste of the food.
not relevant. we do not have taste of food as a reasoning.
_________________

New system -Avoids spoilage longer

Conclusion: In future less food will be thrown without being sold.

What will strengthen the conclusion? If we can say that yes, spoilage is the reason food is thrown today. If it didn't spoil, people would buy it eventually.

Think about it: what if food was thrown before because demand is erratic? Sometimes, people just don't want it so finally after waiting for days, you need to throw the food to make shelf space.
Then will the new system help? No. Food will still be thrown irrespective of whether it spoils or not.
If the reason food is thrown is that it spoils so people are unable to buy, then the new system will help.

Hence (D) is correct.

(A) The cost of the refrigerator system will not outweigh the cost of the food spoilage.

Cost is irrelevant. The argument is only about whether food will need to be thrown or not.

(B) The restaurant has not had an increase in sales since the refrigerator system was put in place.

Irrelevant. Sale of the restaurant depends on many factors.

(C) Some of the restaurants in the chain still use the old refrigeration system.

Irrelevant. Still less food should be thrown by those stores where the change has been made.

(E) The new refrigeration system has no effect on the taste of the food.

Taste of the food is irrelevant to our argument. We don't know what is meant by "effect on taste of food" - is it a good effect or bad effect? Did the old system have some effect? Also how does "taste" impact sale? We are not given. We need to work within the scope of our argument and (D) does that very well.

Answer (D)
_________________

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.
_________________