Last visit was: 19 Jun 2024, 13:00 It is currently 19 Jun 2024, 13:00
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 5327
Own Kudos [?]: 35666 [123]
Given Kudos: 9464
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6954
Own Kudos [?]: 64275 [16]
Given Kudos: 1808
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Status:Booth 1Y
Posts: 278
Own Kudos [?]: 1170 [13]
Given Kudos: 228
Location: United States (IL)
GMAT 1: 690 Q44 V41
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.62
WE:Sales (Computer Software)
General Discussion
PM Intern
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 222
Own Kudos [?]: 182 [0]
Given Kudos: 197
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V41
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
Intern
Joined: 06 Oct 2019
Posts: 43
Own Kudos [?]: 86 [2]
Given Kudos: 71
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V41
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
arora1 wrote:

I agree with arora1.
I eliminated D based on the fact that "Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills". So no matter how many or how few the number of mills inspected, the ones certified are legit ones. So this statement does not seem to weaken the justification in my opinion.

Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2014
Posts: 90
Own Kudos [?]: 103 [5]
Given Kudos: 233
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
5
Kudos
generis wrote:
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna's furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim?

A) Only about one-third of Flyna's inspectors were hired from outside the company.

B) Country X's government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.

C) Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.

D) The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

E) Illegal logging costs Country X's government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.

Source: Official Guide Verbal Review 2021
CR12701.02

Conclusion : Flyna uses only legalized wood supply from country X.
Premise 1: Flyna set up certification scheme for its lumber mills
Premise 2: Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills.

With this in mind, we will analyze the answer choices.
A. The source of inspectors neither is our concern nor affects the conclusion. Eliminate A.
B. Subsidies is nowhere discussed in the argument. Eliminate B.
C. Does the cost of hiring inspectors affect the claim that wood supply is totally legal? No. Eliminate C.
D. Murky, so keep D.
E. Again, the cost to the government is not our concern. Eliminate E.

My thought process for D:
Flyna uses only lumber, not any other wood. Closely examine the argument. Certification set up was done only for lumber type of woods. But the conclusion is, the country X's wood supply for Flyna is totally legal. Now, the 10% inspection will happen only in lumber mills.
Also, Notice that the beginning of the argument says, most of the furniture manufactured in country X is from local wood. Ideally, certification has to be set up for all type of local wood. So, though the 10% inspection may be sufficient for Lumber, it may not be sufficient for other type of woods.
Put simply, Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Okay, Does it also use pinewood from illegal logging? This may sound awkward, but that is how I thought during 2 min 30 sec.

Any corrections in the above explanation is appreciated.
Intern
Joined: 23 Sep 2018
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
GMATNinja : Can you please explain why is D preferred over A? D is saying that the audit need not necessarily ensure that all mills are legally compliant while A is saying the same albeit in a different way
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4938
Own Kudos [?]: 7741 [5]
Given Kudos: 218
Location: India
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
5
Kudos
aashwill wrote:
GMATNinja : Can you please explain why is D preferred over A? D is saying that the audit need not necessarily ensure that all mills are legally compliant while A is saying the same albeit in a different way

Hi

If we are to interpret (A) as saying that "the audit need not necessarily ensure that all mills are legally compliant", then it is necessary to assume that the auditors who are from within Flyna are, either intentionally or otherwise, not doing their jobs correctly. There is nothing in the passage to suggest this differential between internal and external auditors - please keep in mind that as per the stimulus, the auditors are inspecting mills in a foreign country. Hence, it is probable that these are different companies and even auditors internal to Flyna may be "external" auditors for these manufacturing companies in Country X.

Overall, given the above doubts, we cannot be sure that Option (A) sufficiently weakens the argument. Option (D) does so in a much more direct fashion and hence is the better choice.

Hope this helps.
Joined: 19 Sep 2018
Posts: 90
Own Kudos [?]: 66 [0]
Given Kudos: 945
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
GMATNinja wrote:
Debo1988 wrote:
arora1 wrote:

I agree with arora1.
I eliminated D based on the fact that "Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills". So no matter how many or how few the number of mills inspected, the ones certified are legit ones. So this statement does not seem to weaken the justification in my opinion.

Here's how Flyna's certification scheme works:

• Flyna only uses lumber from mills that it certifies.
• To certify mills, Flyna's staff reviews documents to ensure legal origin.
• To verify those documents, Flyna makes surprise visits to mills.

The passage doesn't say that Flyna pays surprise visits to ALL mills that have submitted documents for verification. And the passage doesn't say that Flyna ONLY certifies mills that it has surprised with a visit.

Now, to your point, the passage doesn't say that Flyna certifies mills that it has NOT visited. We don't have that information.

Lucky for us, Choice (D) fills this information gap by telling us outright what proportion of Country X's mills are actually visited by Flyna:

Quote:
D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

Because this proportion is quite low (10%), this choice undermines Flyna's scheme for certification, and that scheme is the basis for Flyna's justification.

If true, Choice (D) doesn't demolish the claim. But no other answer choice does a better job of undermining the logic laid out in the passage.

That's why (D) is the best choice. I hope this helps!

Hi GMATNinja,

I understand that the passage doesn't say that Flyna pays surprise visits to ALL mills that have submitted documents for verification. Also the passage doesn't say that Flyna ONLY certifies mills that it has surprised with a visit.
The above COULD mean that Flyna's staff might have given certifications to mills that haven't been surprised by visits.
However, don't we have to make the above additional assumptions for D to be a valid weakener? Since all D tells us is that Flyna's staff inspects about 10 percent of ALL mills in Country X. It doesn't tell us anything about any mills that exist that are certified but haven't been paid surprise visits. That bit has to be assumed from our side for D to be valid.
Would love to know your thoughts.

Regards,
Udit
Current Student
Joined: 26 Oct 2018
Posts: 17
Own Kudos [?]: 87 [1]
Given Kudos: 114
Location: United States (VA)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V42
GMAT 2: 780 Q49 V51 (Online)
GPA: 3.26
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
> “Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills.”

Well, how are mills certified? We must invalidate the certification process to weaken the claim that the lumber is legal.

> “Auditors and forestry professionals… review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber.”

1) Review documentation
2) Make surprise visits
3) Certify mills

So either the review process is bad or the people doing the reviews are bad.

> (D) The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

This means nothing at all. An annual inspection is never stated as necessary. Clearly all mills must be reviewed to be certified, so who cares how often this “inspection” occurs as long as it certainly must happen at least once? And what constitutes an inspection? This answer is the first time the term is introduced.

IMO, this is a poor question with no good answer. (A) requires an assumption about the ethics of internal auditors and (D) requires an assumption about the certification process.
Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Posts: 117
Own Kudos [?]: 38 [0]
Given Kudos: 599
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
Hi Experts.

I have a question on this.

I'm still confused with the OA.

The passage states that "Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills."
And in order to certify mills, Flyna need to make surprise visits to mills to verify documents.
(So it's justified that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.)

From this, I think, it can be inferred that Flyna would not use wood from uncertified mills.
So why do we need to care about those 90% that Flyna still not make surprise visits (as suggested in D) ?

Thank you
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4938
Own Kudos [?]: 7741 [0]
Given Kudos: 218
Location: India
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
Top Contributor
ballest127 wrote:
Hi Experts.

I have a question on this.

I'm still confused with the OA.

The passage states that "Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills."
And in order to certify mills, Flyna need to make surprise visits to mills to verify documents.
(So it's justified that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.)

From this, I think, it can be inferred that Flyna would not use wood from uncertified mills.
So why do we need to care about those 90% that Flyna still not make surprise visits (as suggested in D) ?

Thank you

Hi

The passage does not state that Flyna only uses lumber from mills certified in the last one year. From the information given in the passage, it is a reasonable inference that once certified, Flyna continues to source lumber from that mill till it is de-certified. Given that Flyna only inspects 10% of X's mills in a year, assuming truly randomized selection, each mill should be inspected only on average every ten years or so. So Flyna may be sourcing lumber from a mill which was certified 10 years (or even more) ago. This throws Flyna's claims of sourcing only legally lumbered wood into doubt.

Hope this clarifies.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6954
Own Kudos [?]: 64275 [2]
Given Kudos: 1808
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
2
Kudos
ballest127 wrote:
Hi Experts.

I have a question on this.

I'm still confused with the OA.

The passage states that "Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills."
And in order to certify mills, Flyna need to make surprise visits to mills to verify documents.
(So it's justified that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.)

From this, I think, it can be inferred that Flyna would not use wood from uncertified mills.
So why do we need to care about those 90% that Flyna still not make surprise visits (as suggested in D) ?

Thank you

From what's in the passage, we don't need to infer the Flyna would not use wood from uncertified mills -- we're told that in the sentence that says:

"Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills"

Flyna will only use wood from certified mills BUT how reliable is the certification? That is the part of the argument that (D) works to undermine. (D) tells us:
Quote:
D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

If only 10% of Country X's lumber mills are inspected each year -- and we know that illegal logging is a problem in Country X. Then how do we know the wood from the other 90% of the mills does not have any association with the illegal loggers?

Similarly, there's nothing to say that a mill that has a certification must have been inspected. Flyna might have given out the certification to mills with the intention of inspecting them in the coming years. We don't know that a certified mill has been inspected this year, last year, or in any year.

There could be several mills that hold the certification but use wood obtained by illegal logging. These mills are just hoping they're not in the 10% randomly selected for inspection that year.

Flyna has created a certification system but may not be inspecting enough mills to ensure its certification scheme does the job it's supposed to. Using this information, we cannot be certain that these mills are supplying legally sourced lumber. Therefore, we cannot verify Flyna's claim that its Country X wood is obtained legally.

This is how (D) undermines the justification provided for Flyna's claim and is why (D) is the answer to this question.

I hope that helps!
Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2020
Posts: 86
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [1]
Given Kudos: 121
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.6
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
GMATNinja
Hi,

In several questions, the correct answer uses sampling techniques and is considered acceptable. So I refrained from choosing D as sampling is an acceptable technique for auditing. I chose answer A instead because if Flyna's inspectors where not from an outside organization we cannot be sure of the correctness of it's claim. But turns out here the sampling techniques is incorrect.

While I am able to understand the explanation offered I am unable to wrap my head around it because I feel a lot of this seems very subjective. Can you please tell me where I am going wrong and in what way I can improve myself.
Manager
Joined: 17 Jun 2020
Posts: 104
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 314
Location: India
Schools: Simon '25
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
generis wrote:
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna's furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim?

A. Only about one-third of Flyna's inspectors were hired from outside the company.

B. Country X's government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.

C. Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.

D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

E. Illegal logging costs Country X's government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.

CR12701.02

Hello,
Option D says "The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected"
and the premise says that Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills.
So even if only 10% mills are inspected (and say some are certified from this 10%), Flyna is still using wood from these 10% mills, right? So as long as Flyna uses wood from the inspected mills only, it should support the conclusion that "Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified."

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6954
Own Kudos [?]: 64275 [2]
Given Kudos: 1808
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Bhu750 wrote:
GMATNinja
Hi,

In several questions, the correct answer uses sampling techniques and is considered acceptable. So I refrained from choosing D as sampling is an acceptable technique for auditing. I chose answer A instead because if Flyna's inspectors where not from an outside organization we cannot be sure of the correctness of it's claim. But turns out here the sampling techniques is incorrect.

While I am able to understand the explanation offered I am unable to wrap my head around it because I feel a lot of this seems very subjective. Can you please tell me where I am going wrong and in what way I can improve myself.

It's best to treat every CR question individually rather than trying to develop a systems of "rules" based on other CR questions. Here, we're asked to undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim. (D) does exactly this (as explained here).

We totally understand the impulse to categorize CR questions and develop "shortcuts" that allow you to quickly make eliminations, but the truth is that these shortcuts just don't exist, so attempting to use them will deeply hurt your accuracy. For a broader and more flexible approach to CR, check out this article, and for more on how shortcuts will kill your score, take a look at this video.

I hope that helps a bit!
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6954
Own Kudos [?]: 64275 [1]
Given Kudos: 1808
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
SDW2 wrote:
generis wrote:
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna's furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim?

A. Only about one-third of Flyna's inspectors were hired from outside the company.

B. Country X's government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.

C. Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.

D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

E. Illegal logging costs Country X's government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.

CR12701.02

Hello,
Option D says "The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected"
and the premise says that Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills.
So even if only 10% mills are inspected (and say some are certified from this 10%), Flyna is still using wood from these 10% mills, right? So as long as Flyna uses wood from the inspected mills only, it should support the conclusion that "Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified."

Check out this post and see whether that clears things up!
Intern
Joined: 25 Feb 2021
Posts: 32
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna’s furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X’s lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna’s claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

P : Flyna Company manufactures goods via illegal logging?
P : Flyna set up a certification
A : certification made is valid
What might make the certification invalid?
1. wide-spread fraud in making certification
2. People who make certification lacks such ability to do so
3. mills tend to use illegal lumber after certification is given
C : wood supply from country X is legally justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna’s claim?

A. Only about one-third of Flyna’s inspectors were hired from outside the company.
-> We can only infer that two-third of inspectors were hired inside the company. However, being hired inside the company does not mean that the person must be unscrupulous.

B. Country X’s government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.
-> Country X's reduced subsidies is not directly linked with the issue given in the argument.

C. Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.
-> It can be inferred that Flyna must have had to pay more than expected. However, no guarantee is given that Flyna must have hired fewer people than it has planned.

D. The proportion of Country X’s lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna’s staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.
-> Correct. Option D tells us that only small portion of lumber mills are actually inspected. Thus, leaving vast majority of other mills under question.

E. Illegal logging costs Country X’s government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.
-> Option E gives reason for country X to eliminate illegal logging. However, such information gives no clue to infer whether the country X actually tried to do so and what impact would the trial had to Flyna.
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2020
Posts: 456
Own Kudos [?]: 123 [0]
Given Kudos: 283
GRE 1: Q168 V160
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
Quote:
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna's furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim?

A. Only about one-third of Flyna's inspectors were hired from outside the company.

B. Country X's government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.

C. Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.

D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

E. Illegal logging costs Country X's government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.

GMATNinja I was personally thrown off by the "randomly selected" line. The way I thought of it was: "well if they're randomly selected, even though it's 10%, it's unlikely that there's foulplay". Obviously, D is incorrect. However, how can we make sure to not misinterpret phrases like "randomly selected"?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6954
Own Kudos [?]: 64275 [1]
Given Kudos: 1808
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1
Kudos
samsung1234 wrote:
Quote:
Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furniture retailer, because most of Flyna's furniture is manufactured in Country X from local wood, and illegal logging is widespread there. However, Flyna has set up a certification scheme for lumber mills. It has hired a staff of auditors and forestry professionals who review documentation of the wood supply of Country X's lumber mills to ensure its legal origin, make surprise visits to mills to verify documents, and certify mills as approved sources of legally obtained lumber. Flyna uses only lumber from certified mills. Thus, Flyna's claim that its Country X wood supply is obtained legally is justified.

Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the justification provided for Flyna's claim?

A. Only about one-third of Flyna's inspectors were hired from outside the company.

B. Country X's government recently reduced its subsidies for lumber production.

C. Flyna has had to pay higher than expected salaries to attract qualified inspectors.

D. The proportion of Country X's lumber mills inspected each year by Flyna's staff is about 10 percent, randomly selected.

E. Illegal logging costs Country X's government a significant amount in lost revenue each year.

GMATNinja I was personally thrown off by the "randomly selected" line. The way I thought of it was: "well if they're randomly selected, even though it's 10%, it's unlikely that there's foulplay". Obviously, D is incorrect. However, how can we make sure to not misinterpret phrases like "randomly selected"?

There are a few things to keep in mind in order to avoid the type of mistake that you made on this question. First, be sure to use the author’s words and not your own. The author’s conclusion is NOT that it’s unlikely that Flyna uses illegally sourced wood. Rather, he/she concludes that Flyna is justified in claiming that it uses only lumber from certified mills. While the difference is subtle, those are two very distinct claims.

Additionally, try your best to avoid zeroing in on a particular word or phrase and then creating a story. It’s easy to focus on “randomly selected” and miss the fact that it’s only 10% of Flyna’s lumber mills.

Finally, remember the question that’s being asked. We’re asked which of the answer choices does the MOST to undermine the justification provided for Flyna’s claim. That means we’re not looking for something that disproves their claim. We’re just looking for something that provides reason to doubt it. And we’re looking for the best answer choice (the answer choice that does the MOST to undermine the justification for Flyna’s claim).

So even if I don’t think (D) does a whole lot to undermine the claim, it definitely does the MOST of all the answer choices.

I hope that helps!
Re: Stockholders have been critical of the Flyna Company, a major furnitur [#permalink]
1   2
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6954 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
821 posts