Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 8
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 Feb 2017, 10:42

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Forum Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2021
Followers: 162

Kudos [?]: 1742 [0], given: 376

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2011, 14:12
I spent 4 minutes without choosing any answer. I feel the supposedly supportive statement is as bad as the argument itself.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 29 Nov 2010
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

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

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2011, 23:08
Correct answer is C since this argument twice prove fund raisers passivity.
Manager
Joined: 12 Jul 2011
Posts: 151
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 42

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2011, 03:54
fluke wrote:
greatfriend wrote:
Correct answer is C since this argument twice prove fund raisers passivity.

I ruled out C.

Fact:
80% of the people CONTACTED donated.

Argument says:
This great percentage is an indicator that shows the fundraiser contacted only frequent donors, or it could not have had such high success rate.

C says: Fundraiser didn't contact the regular donors because most of them donated voluntarily. This goes against the argument by targeting the assumption in the reasoning of the argument. If regular donors were not contacted so much, then the 80% success rate could only be from the less-likely donors who were actually contacted.

I selected C, but am wrong
thanks for the explanation.
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 135
Location: United States
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 5

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2011, 04:40
A compares the S university fundraisers with the fundraisers of some other Y university(ies). Now, who knows about the fundraisers in Y university - Whether they are too good that the total % > 80, or < 80, or what? - Too OOS.

On the other hand, C remains the answer. I tell you, C tries to bank on excessive passivity of the fundraisers, possibly too strong to read through the stem again. Such strong answers are not expected in GMAT land, (allegedly from a few experts ), so off the worst, possible C, handles the bill!

Thanks!
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Posts: 191
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: Q V
GPA: 3.7
WE: Account Management (Consumer Products)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 154 [0], given: 4

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2011, 13:10
I still go with the answer A because the premise has been talking about the success rate of the fund raisers and not about the total amounted donated. If donors donated on their free will it doesn't show much relevance on how successful the fund raisers were because those donors are not in the equation of the success rate.
Answer A is not a strong argument for the conclusion but it still supports that the fund raisers are not doing anything special relative to any other school and the success rate of 80% is just because they contacted previous donors.
_________________

DETERMINED TO BREAK 700!!!

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 911
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 74

Kudos [?]: 624 [0], given: 44

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2011, 14:07
The correct choice is A. It reflect the effort of fund raisers. Choice C make sense that the fund raisers in this school do not do anything to prove their efforts. So, C is wrong
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Director
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 563
Location: United States
GPA: 3.86
WE: Accounting (Commercial Banking)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 220 [0], given: 16

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2011, 03:47
Its C
_________________

Manager
Status: Taking heavily leveraged but calculated risks at all times
Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Posts: 185
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Schools: HBS '15, Stanford '15
GMAT Date: 01-31-2012
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 12

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Dec 2011, 17:33
Somehow this one's explanation has always dodged my understanding
Intern
Joined: 17 Jan 2012
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

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

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2012, 20:40
By POE, it must be A
Manager
Status: I will not stop until i realise my goal which is my dream too
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 235
Schools: Johnson '15
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 50 [0], given: 16

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2012, 05:08
Anasthaesium wrote:
Somehow this one's explanation has always dodged my understanding

same with me...i felt the answer is C based on my understanding, but the official answer is A...so i dont know how to understand this problem
_________________

Regards,
Harsha

Note: Give me kudos if my approach is right , else help me understand where i am missing.. I want to bell the GMAT Cat

Satyameva Jayate - Truth alone triumphs

Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 244
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 25

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2012, 23:30
drdas wrote:
Smithtown University’s fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.

Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?

(A) Smithtown University’s fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people.
(B) This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university’s fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before.
(C) This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university’s fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors.
(D) The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before.
(E) More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University’s fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.

Option A is irrelevant as it compares donors from other universities to Smithtown’s university.
Option B is also irrelevant as average size of the donation does not affect the conclusion.
option C strengthens the conclusion as donors whom the contact is not made is making donation then measuring success based on conversion of these donors is wrong. --- correct answer
option D we cannot compare amount of donation with no of donations. This statement is either irrelevant or indirectly weakens the conclusion.
option E again the amount of money and no of donations should not be compared.... irrelevant

I am not sure why OA is A.... Please enlighten me
_________________

-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------

Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 195
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 6

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2012, 02:41
IanStewart +1 for you........

Intern
Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 6

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Apr 2012, 12:24
I enjoy the communities effort to democratically elect the answer. It seems the majority either voted for A or C. My contribution to this problem would point out that A says nothing about the canvassing efforts, which is the main argument. The main argument states that the high success rate shows insufficient canvassing efforts, even though 80% of contacted donors donated.

A) points out that the success rate of Smithtowns fund-raisers is about as good as everyone elses. (However, we are supposed to find that they did a bad job)
C) points out that the majority of the donations came from donors that previously had donated but weren't even contacted. (Now, if Georgetown fund-raisers received money from 80% of the donors they contacted - and still got more of their donations from people that had previously donated without being contacted - can only mean that they didn't even contact donors that previously donated - meaning they were REALLY bad fundraisers. As it is stated in the stem, good fundraisers constantly try less likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. Bad ones don't do this and instead just focus on the low hanging fruit offered by previous donors. In C), the fundraisers didn't even do that - which clearly shows insufficient canvassing efforts.)

Just food for thought.
Intern
Joined: 17 May 2012
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2012, 09:37
certainly a 700 level question. Great explanation from Ian!
Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 22

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2012, 01:56
B, D and E weeken the conclusion.

In case of C, it is stated that many past donors have donated without being contacted by the fund raisers. This means more fund came from new donor base. This actually strengthens the fund raisers being effective.

A is the only possible choice.
Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Posts: 139
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 90 [0], given: 38

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2012, 05:15
Whats the conclusion here?

How does A relate to it?

Isnt c Obvious?
_________________

Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1153
Location: United States
Followers: 263

Kudos [?]: 2918 [0], given: 123

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2013, 01:12
Got this question right. Sorry, but I don't think this one is at 700 level.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Intern
Joined: 09 Dec 2010
Posts: 1
Schools: MIT, LBS, Chicago, UCLA
Followers: 0

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

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2013, 04:55
C. Only C relates directly to the question.
Intern
Joined: 04 Apr 2013
Posts: 16
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GPA: 3
Followers: 0

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

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2013, 05:31
C is correct.

Question is aimed at determining whether or not the fund raisers are 'good fundraisers' or not... nothing else. By the question, a 'good fundraiser' is one who seeks to tap less-likely prospects and people who have not donated before thus giving a lower overall success rate.

Only answer 'C' addresses this as it states that most of the donations came from people who had donated previously, as they are the most likely to donate again. The fundraisers at Smithtown did not even contact these people, thus showing that the fundraisers were 'not good'.

Answer A us about frequency compared to other universities (??), Answer B is about 'average size of donations' (??), Answer D states that majority where from donors who never gave before which goes against the argument and does not support it, and Answer E is again, going against the argument not supporting it.

BOOM
Intern
Joined: 10 Apr 2013
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2013, 13:30
It cannot be "C". the 80% success rate is based on donators they have contacted. Since "C" states that "most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university’s fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors" then the 80% success rate has to come from first time donators which seriously weakens the argument.

By opposition, "A" implies that the fund raisers haven't been particularly successful in getting money from first time donators as they succeeded only "as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities". In this case, the 80% success rate must come from people who had previously donated, thus strengthening the argument.

hope this helps
Re: Smithtown University s fund-raisers succeeded in getting   [#permalink] 10 Apr 2013, 13:30

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9    Next  [ 173 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The Smithtown Theatre, a town theatre that stages old Broadway shows, 3 19 Sep 2016, 13:38
27 #Top150 CR: Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting 14 11 Dec 2015, 21:01
1 The Smithtown Theatre, which stages old plays, has announced an expans 2 15 Dec 2014, 08:02
9 Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting 5 12 Dec 2011, 00:23
4 High school students who feel that they are not succeeding 21 16 Mar 2007, 08:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by