Pankaj0901 wrote:
I think I am having some trouble understanding the underlying logic of the passage.
Why are companies "inducing" smokers to "switch brands" in the first place? If I am the owner of a cigarette company, I would never want any of my existing cigarette smokers to switch to any other brand. Why will I ever induce anyone to switch? What am I missing?
AndrewN - Can you please only help me understand the logic, just the logic of the passage. I could not figure out from the explanations in this thread as they are mostly around explanations of the option choices. Thanks
MamtaKrishnia wrote:
Surveys show that every year only 10 percent of cigarette smokers switch brands. Yet the manufacturers have been spending an amount equal to 10 percent of their gross receipts on cigarette promotion in magazines. It follows from these figures that inducing cigarette smokers to switch brands did not pay, and that cigarette companies would have been no worse off economically if they had dropped their advertising.
Hello,
Pankaj0901. Companies—specifically,
brands—are understood to be vying for customers in the passage, so Company A might run an ad to persuade smokers who use products from Company B to smoke products from Company A instead. The line in red is drawing a conclusion from the two figures that mention
10 percent, commenting that if
only 10 percent of cigarette smokers switch brands each year, but manufacturers continue to spend a lot of money (
10 percent of their gross receipts) to promote their products in magazines, it seems like a losing proposition.
I will leave my passage breakdown at that. If you can make sense of the passage and answer choices now, so much the better. Thank you for thinking to ask.
- Andrew
_________________
I am no longer contributing to GMAT Club. Please request an active Expert or a peer review if you have questions.