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

It is currently 17 Dec 2018, 06:56

R1 Decisions:

Michigan Ross Chat (US calls are expected today)  |  UCLA Anderson Chat  (Calls expected to start at 7am PST; Applicants from Asia will hear first)


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
Events & Promotions in December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
  • 10 Keys to nail DS and CR questions

     December 17, 2018

     December 17, 2018

     06:00 PM PST

     07:00 PM PST

    Join our live webinar and learn how to approach Data Sufficiency and Critical Reasoning problems, how to identify the best way to solve each question and what most people do wrong.
  • R1 Admission Decisions: Estimated Decision Timelines and Chat Links for Major BSchools

     December 17, 2018

     December 17, 2018

     10:00 PM PST

     11:00 PM PST

    From Dec 5th onward, American programs will start releasing R1 decisions. Chat Rooms: We have also assigned chat rooms for every school so that applicants can stay in touch and exchange information/update during decision period.

Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Posts: 202
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 02 Nov 2018, 00:07
14
74
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (01:44) correct 55% (01:38) wrong based on 4566 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced-impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?


(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.



Verbal Question of The Day: Day 253: Sentence Correction


Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS
For All QOTD Questions Click Here


Similar question: LINK

_________________

Please give kudos if you enjoy the explanations that I have given. Thanks :)


Originally posted by perfectstranger on 19 Aug 2009, 14:05.
Last edited by Bunuel on 02 Nov 2018, 00:07, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8683
Location: Pune, India
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2012, 22:18
11
12
betterscore wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.


Responding to a pm:

Conclusion of the argument: Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic

First statement: several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, - evidence supporting 'depositors have been greatly relieved'

Second statement: corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors - evidence supporting 'reasoning is overoptimistic'. This sentence questions the evidence of the first sentence. So, executives are buying shares in their own bank - well, they have been known to do that. It is a calculated step.

So the first bold sentence gives support to the conclusion that investors are relieved. But the second bold sentence questions this support and hence gives support to 'they probably shouldn't be relieved'.

As for (D), I don't think it makes much sense to me at all.

Let's look at it in detail:

The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain - the entire argument is explaining a circumstance. The first bold statement itself is not doing it. It only explains why people are relieved - the conclusion which the argument questions.

the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish. - the explanation that the argument would establish would be the conclusion endorsed by the argument. The second statement is a premise, not a conclusion endorsed by the argument.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2151
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Mar 2018, 07:56
15
4
Since this is a Bold Face question, let's start by ignoring the BF and focusing on the conclusion and argument. The conclusion is that "[the reasoning of the bank's depositor's] might well be overoptimistic." Now let's breakdown the argument (again, ignore the BF for now):

  • First, there were "rumors that the bank faced-impending financial collapse." These rumors made the bank's depositors worried.
  • Then, it became known that "several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank." This news made the bank's depositors relieved (i.e. made them stop worrying).
  • Why were they relieved by this news? "They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false." - If several of the bank's top execs have been buying shares in their own bank, they must have faith in the bank's financial soundness. Thus, according to the depositors, the actions of the execs shows that the rumors about financial collapse must be false.
  • Why does the author believe that the depositors are being overoptimistic? Because "corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health"

According to the depositors, the execs actions are evidence that the execs have faith in the bank's financial soundness. The author suggests an alternative explanation for the execs actions. The execs might be buying the shares NOT because they have faith but because they want to dispel negative rumors about the company's health. Obviously such rumors, true or not, would be bad for the company, so it makes sense that execs would want to dispel those rumors.

Now that we understand the argument, let's see how the boldfaced portions fit into that argument:

    1) "several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank" - The depositors took this as evidence that the execs had faith in the bank's financial soundness. According to the author, this evidence does NOT necessarily support the depositors' belief.
    2) "since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health" - In other words, "BECAUSE there's another possible explanation," the author questions the depositors' logic. The 2nd boldfaced portion is the reason why the author questions their logic

Which answer choice best describes the boldfaced portions?

Quote:
(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

The depositors believe that the first BF portion is evidence that the execs had faith in the bank's financial soundness. Thus, the first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting the conclusion of the depositors. The first half looks good.

The second BF portion explains WHY the author questions the depositors' logic. The 2nd includes an alternative explanation for the execs actions. So perhaps those actions do NOT support the conclusion of the depositors. Thus, the 2nd gives a reason for questioning whether the 1st actually supports the depositors' conclusion. (A) looks good.

Quote:
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

As described for (A), the first part looks good. But the second part is not the author's conclusion. The author's conclusion (the contrary conclusion) is that "[the reasoning of the bank's depositor's] might well be overoptimistic." The second BF portion supports the author's conclusion, but it is not the conclusion itself. Eliminate (B).

Quote:
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

The first is evidence in support of the depositors' conclusion, not the main conclusion of the argument. Again, the second is not the main conclusion. Eliminate (C).

Quote:
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

The author does not claim that the execs are buying shares because "corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health." In other words, the 2nd portion is not presented as an explanation itself. Instead, it is the reason the author questions the depositors' explanation.

Also, the author's goal is not to explain why the execs are buying shares. The author does not pretend to know the motives behind the execs actions. All the author wants to show is that the depositors' reasoning might be wrong. So the first half of (D) does not accurately describe the purpose of the argument as a whole. Eliminate (D).

Quote:
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

The author is not necessarily trying to establish that the execs were buying shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health. The author simply wants to present this possibility to show that the depositors might be wrong.

Also, as described for (D), the first half does not accurately describe the purpose of the argument as a whole. Eliminate (E).

(A) is the best option.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Most Helpful Community Reply
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 1720
Concentration: Finance
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2013, 14:42
20
10
betterscore wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.
(B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.


Let’s begin dissecting. The conclusion is ‘Such reasoning might be overoptimistic’. So the second boldface is actually the premise. Now I’m not 100% sure what the first boldface is. But I’m pretty sure that the second one is the premise. So let’s start eliminating answer choices that say otherwise. ‘B’ says that the second is a conclusion. This is clearly not the case. ‘C’ also says that the second boldface is a conclusion, when we have already identified it as a premise. ‘D’ says that the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish. This sounds as if it were the conclusion too. So this doesn’t fit the bill either. Now ‘E’ says that the second provides evidence in support. This sounds like a premise so I’ll keep it. Now between ‘A’ and ‘E’ we will have to check what the first boldface might mean. ‘A’ says that the first bold is ‘a premise that supports A conclusion’. Not necessarily the ‘main conclusion’, whilst ‘E’ is saying that it is A conclusion, not a premise. The first boldface is clearly a premise. They have been relieved, why? Because executives have been buying shares. So ‘A’ is the correct answer.

This question is in fact very difficult because it is based on your ability to distinguish among premises and conclusion. Note that the stimulus contains all of these: counterpremise, counterconclusion, premise and conclusion. By using the ‘why’ technique we can easily differentiate between premises and conclusions. Another key takeaway is to be aware of the phrase ‘A conclusion’ and be able to consider that there may be more than one conclusion in a stimulus.

Hope it helps
Cheers!
J :)
General Discussion
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 266
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Aug 2009, 23:05
14
2
I also think that the answer should be A. Here's my line of reasoning


Premise 1: several of a bank's ' top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
Sub-conclusion: the bank's depositors have been greatly relieved

Premise 2: top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness
Sub-conclusion: those worrisome rumors must be false

conclusion and MP: Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic
Premise 3 that supports the main conclusion: corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health

IMO the main point is that the reasoning is not good. So what the argument seeks to establish is that the bank's depositors wrongly assumed that several top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank's financial soundness

taking a look at the answer choices

A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

This seems to fit with the structure of the passage. The first bold face statement support the conclusion that top executives have been buying shares in their own bank because they have faith in the bank

B) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.
The second bold face statement is not a conclusion, so we can rule this one out.

C) The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion
second is not a conclusion but rather a premise. We can rule out this one as well.

D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

What the argument seeks to explain is that bank's depositors wrongly drew their conclusion and this is not mentioned in the first bold statement.

E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Same reasoning as in D.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Feb 2011
Posts: 3
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2012, 16:28
4
1
tried this question for the second time and came up with (A) as the answer.

as for choice (D):
(D) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.
=> the argument as a whole is not seeking to explain the first boldface, namely several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
but instead is trying to refute the claim that rumors about impending financial collapse of the bank must be false.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 306
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2012, 08:47
10
1
Clear A , for boldface questions I found to go through the following steps -->

1) Identify the main conclusion of the passage , then see what part does bold face plays in the conclusion.
2) Identify the tone of the parts , generally its easy to discard some options on this basis.
Example -->
several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank and
corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health

These two are opposite in tones so one can decide on that. In this question all the answer choices except A and B have the two parts in same tone.

Now among A and B , B states for second part that its the main conclusion which it is not cause the main conclusion is

since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false

Hence A prevails
_________________

Please press KUDOS if you like my post

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 726
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Premium Member
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 15 Jan 2013, 10:12
Folks,

People are accepting that conclusion is :Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic
Then how A,B,C could be answers.

Plz anyone can elaborate reasoning behind A if the above mentioned is the conclusion.

Rgds,
Saurabh

Originally posted by TGC on 15 Jan 2013, 10:01.
Last edited by TGC on 15 Jan 2013, 10:12, edited 1 time in total.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8683
Location: Pune, India
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jan 2013, 19:18
1
targetgmatchotu wrote:
Folks,

People are accepting that conclusion is :Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic
Then how A,B,C could be answers.

Plz anyone can elaborate reasoning behind A if the above mentioned is the conclusion.

Rgds,
Saurabh


There are two different conclusions here:

A conclusion: Depositors are relieved - belief of people in general
The argument gives the reasons they are relieved.

Main conclusion of the argument - this is the author's belief - 'Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic'
The author gives the reasons why this reasoning may be overoptimisitic.

(A) states 'The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion'
It doesn't say that it supports the 'main conclusion'.

(C) says that 'The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument'
This is certainly incorrect.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 23
Concentration: Operations, General Management
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Apr 2014, 05:42
OA?
What is the official answer? A?
Why not B?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8683
Location: Pune, India
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Apr 2014, 18:04
1
nidhi12 wrote:
OA?
What is the official answer? A?
Why not B?


The OA is A.

B is incorrect because the second boldface is not the main conclusion of the argument. the main conclusion of the argument is "Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic"
Conclusions are not facts; they are opinions of the author. The second boldface is a premise, a fact given to you. It is not the author's opinion and hence not the conclusion.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Posts: 21
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jul 2014, 12:06
To e-gmat

As per session given by Chiranjeev, something that author believes i.e his opinion can be regarded as intermediate conclusion.
Here in the correct choice - A, the first boldface is taken as a conclusion.
I actually scoped it out because of the reason given above.
Also, Why E is wrong here.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 13
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Leadership
GMAT Date: 09-19-2014
GPA: 3.8
WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jul 2014, 20:34
I am Never Good at these type of CR. Please help me with some Document on these.

I marked (D) and Guess I was completely wrong with this one.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8683
Location: Pune, India
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jul 2014, 19:34
karna2129 wrote:
I am Never Good at these type of CR. Please help me with some Document on these.

I marked (D) and Guess I was completely wrong with this one.


I assume you are having trouble with bold face questions. Here are a couple of posts on these that might help you:

http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2013/03 ... -the-gmat/
http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/01 ... questions/

For the solution of this question, check: since-it-has-become-known-that-several-of-a-bank-s-top-136001.html#p1112808
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2773
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jul 2014, 21:00
rajgurinder wrote:
To e-gmat

As per session given by Chiranjeev, something that author believes i.e his opinion can be regarded as intermediate conclusion.
Here in the correct choice - A, the first boldface is taken as a conclusion.
I actually scoped it out because of the reason given above.
Also, Why E is wrong here.


Hi Gurinder

Thanks for writing to us. :)

Before we go on to discussing the correct answer choice, I would like to request you to share your passage analysis with us. Accordingly, please identify each statement as a fact or an opinion and the role played by the boldface portions with respect to the main conclusion of the argument.

Also, please share your understanding of answer choices A and E.

I would specifically want you to reconsider option A. Does it describe first boldface portion as a conclusion? Or does choice A call the first boldface as evidence?

(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

Your analysis would help me in not only addressing this particular doubt but also any possible gaps in your conceptual understanding. Hope you’ll appreciate the same. :)

Thanks!
Dolly
_________________












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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Posts: 21
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jul 2014, 08:22
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.


My analysis

please correct if i am wrong:-
A circumstance is something that is happening currently.

several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank - FACT/Circumstance
the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. - A circumstance
Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic - Conclusion
Corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health - Evidence/Fact supporting a conclusion

Options:-
A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

As per session given by Chiranjeev, something that author believes i.e his opinion can be regarded as intermediate conclusion.
Here in the correct choice - A, the first boldface is taken as a conclusion.

(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Here the argument is explaining why the FIRST BOLDFACE happens, in SECOND BOLDFACE he provides evidence for the explaining that argument seeks to establish(conclusion)
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2773
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2014, 01:44
rajgurinder wrote:
Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.


My analysis

please correct if i am wrong:-
A circumstance is something that is happening currently.

several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank - FACT/Circumstance
the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. - A circumstance
Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic - Conclusion
Corporate executives have been known to buy shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health - Evidence/Fact supporting a conclusion


Hi Gurinder

Thanks for your response! :)

Your analysis of the statements is quite correct; however, you haven’t presented your analysis for the following statement:

“They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.”


Also, is a circumstance always something that is happening currently or can it also be a set of facts that are not time bound?

"Such reasoning might well be overoptimistic" – This is the main conclusion of the argument.
Quote:

Options:-
A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

As per session given by Chiranjeev, something that author believes i.e his opinion can be regarded as intermediate conclusion.
Here in the correct choice - A, the first boldface is taken as a conclusion.
As I mentioned in my previous comment, I would want you to reconsider option A. Does it describe first boldface portion as a conclusion? Or does choice A call the first boldface as evidence?
(A) The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.


You have not understood option A correctly. BF is stated as evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion. In other words, BF is evidence that supports something. What is this something? It is a conclusion. Now is this conclusion the author’s conclusion? To determine the same, you need to define the role of the statement that you have missed in your analysis. Accordingly, please decide whether the conclusion presented in the highlighted portion is by the author or the bank depositors:

They reason that, since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.

Second thing, in BF questions is there a difference between a conclusion and the conclusion? Can’t a third party make “a” conclusion in such arguments? Accordingly, the conclusion highlighted above is an intermediate conclusion by the author or “a” conclusion made by a third party?

Quote:
(E) The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

Here the argument is explaining why the FIRST BOLDFACE happens, in SECOND BOLDFACE he provides evidence for the explaining that argument seeks to establish(conclusion)


Let me ask you a question here. Is the purpose of the argument to explain why the bank depositor’s act in a certain way or is to call in question the reason for their behaviour? Look at the main conclusion again and decide over this.

Please do let me know what you think. :)

Dolly
_________________












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

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 128
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Oct 2014, 09:54
Although I did mark A,I'm finding it difficult to strike out D.
I'm pretty sure during the actual thing would've marked as D and wondered where I had gone wrong with my verbal!
BF1 does seem like a circumstance that the argument seeks to explain later.And BF2 is definitely an explanation for it.Why did the bankers buy shares of a bank that may fail.BF2 clearly explains that.
I might be totally going wrong here though.
Experts please help me out.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8683
Location: Pune, India
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Oct 2014, 20:39
DebWenger wrote:
Although I did mark A,I'm finding it difficult to strike out D.
I'm pretty sure during the actual thing would've marked as D and wondered where I had gone wrong with my verbal!
BF1 does seem like a circumstance that the argument seeks to explain later.And BF2 is definitely an explanation for it.Why did the bankers buy shares of a bank that may fail.BF2 clearly explains that.
I might be totally going wrong here though.
Experts please help me out.



Ask yourself: What does the argument seek to establish?
The author's primary concern here is "don't be too optimistic about the bank"
He starts by explaining what has made people optimistic and why it may not be advisable to rely on that development and be optimistic.

Now, does "several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank," describe what the argument seeks to establish? Mind you, the option has to fit exactly... "it's something like this" does not work. Every sentence in the argument is obviously related to what the author seeks to establish but the sentence must be exactly what the author actually seeks to establish (or conclusion). First bold face is not what the author seeks to establish and hence (D) is not correct.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 128
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2014, 21:15
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
DebWenger wrote:
Although I did mark A,I'm finding it difficult to strike out D.
I'm pretty sure during the actual thing would've marked as D and wondered where I had gone wrong with my verbal!
BF1 does seem like a circumstance that the argument seeks to explain later.And BF2 is definitely an explanation for it.Why did the bankers buy shares of a bank that may fail.BF2 clearly explains that.
I might be totally going wrong here though.
Experts please help me out.



Ask yourself: What does the argument seek to establish?
The author's primary concern here is "don't be too optimistic about the bank"
He starts by explaining what has made people optimistic and why it may not be advisable to rely on that development and be optimistic.

Now, does "several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank," describe what the argument seeks to establish? Mind you, the option has to fit exactly... "it's something like this" does not work. Every sentence in the argument is obviously related to what the author seeks to establish but the sentence must be exactly what the author actually seeks to establish (or conclusion). First bold face is not what the author seeks to establish and hence (D) is not correct.


Thanks for the explanation
Also,for the 1st BF the option "The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to explain","as a whole" is what should have put me of in the first place.
As a whole the argument wants to point out to the depositors ,that don't be too optimistic.Can this be the main point/conclusion of the entire argument?Would love to know your thoughts on this.
Also,is the main point of an argument in most cases the conclusion as well?
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have &nbs [#permalink] 16 Oct 2014, 21:15

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 43 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.