The amount of money estimated to be lost by Hollywood studios due to

I am convinced with D, as it is irrelevant to the conclusion. But why E is wrong. Increased DVD sales are strengthening the argument not weakening it.
I initially picked D, but changed it to E

E saysDomestic DVD sales were sharply higher last year; in the past, strong domestic sales have been an indicator of higher international DVD sales in the following year.

The argument concludes that Hollywood studios have little prospect of making money this year by exporting their films worldwide.

If E is true, it provides a possibility that international DVD sales will be high this year. (Indicating a good prospect).

Thus E weakens the argument.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

This argument concludes that “Hollywood studios have little chance of making money this year by exporting their films worldwide,” based on the premise that profits from piracy overseas rose sharply last year. The argument assumes that no other relevant conditions have changed for the better since then. The question asks for a choice that does not weaken the argument, which means that the correct answer will either strengthen it or is irrelevant.

(A) This choice weakens the argument. It attacks the necessary assumption that $500 million is a large enough amount to destroy Hollywood profits.

(B) This choice weakens the argument. It attacks the necessary assumption that there would not be a heightened and effective law enforcement campaign against piracy.

(C) This choice weakens the argument. It attacks the assumption that there are no other ways for Hollywood studios to profit from export of its films than DVDs.

(D) CORRECT. This choice is irrelevant. The conclusion (and premise) concern money. That all of the Academy Award-nominated films were pirated last year does not increase or diminish the probability of Hollywood studios making money this year. Thus, this does not weaken the argument.

(E) This choice makes the conclusion less likely by providing a premise that suggests that this year’s profits internationally will rise.

That's right. For a question like this, you want to think "not-weaken" rather than "strengthen". If a response is irrelevant, it does not weaken the argument. In this case, that makes it the right choice.

Hi zoskybuck,

If A is irrelevant as per you then it should be the answer.

As this question ask ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WEAKENS THE ARGUMENT EXCEPT.

Every option in CR does one the following three things.
1) Either is Strengthen the argument.
2) Or Weaken the argument
3) Neutral- not at all related to argument.

So in this question each option must weaken the argument.
And if we come across ny option which either Strengthen the argument or NEUTRAL, that should be the answer.



chetan2u / daagh,

Can you please share your thoughts in this.
I choose the answer as E.
Bcz according to me it strengthen the argument.

However I am unable to find out how other option are weakening the argument.

Please assist.

@ RAHKARP27071989,yeah you are correct by saying that "all of the following if true weakens the argument" means we either select that one which strengthen the argument or is neutral but if you ask me,i will say that strengthen the argument should take precedence over being neutral..if you look at this problem,Option A is totally irrelevant if you asked me..$500 million dollars or any amount for that matter was not even mentioned in the argument or was it referred to in the slightest way..Option D actually talks about all films nominated for the Oscar awards last year being pirated on DVD..Its actually talking about piracy here which is the main issue in the argument..For that fact,it should take precedence over Option A ..consider Option D first..only when it has been found out that it weakens the argument should you go ahead and pick option A...Hope i helped with my explanation!!!

Hi zoskybuck,

A is weakening the argument.
Let me tell you my reasoning behind this..

Lets first paraphrase the conclusion-

Conclusion- Hollywood studios have little prospect of making money this year by exporting their films worldwide.

In a layman language we can say that the Hollywood studios is thinking that it can't make much profit by exporting their films worldwide.
So, if we find an option which says--> By exporting their films worldwide Hollywood studios CAN make profit.

A. $500 million represents a very small fraction of overseas profits

Let me give you an example

Suppose you have a domestic business which gives you a profit of 10 million annually. But because of rising local competition you are now able to make a profit of 6 million only.
So now you are at a loss of 10M- 6M= 4 M.
Now suddenly you got a strategy that if if you export your business product internationally then you can compensate the loss. but you think that exporting your products will going to add extra cost-->> Lets say 1 million . Therefore you are reluctant to implement the plan
Your conclusion- are reluctant to implement the plan because you can't make profit

Now you only implement the plan if I assure you that you will definitely make 5 million of profit ( 4 M previous loss + 1 M Add on cost)

Now I say.

5 Million represents a very small fraction of overseas profits--> means you can earn much more 6M... 10 M... 20 M...and so on

Hence your conclusion is WEAKENED....


You will definitely implement the plan NOW

Same option A says here.


Hope it helps...

The amount of money estimated to be lost by Hollywood studios due to DVD piracy overseas increased to more than $500 million last year. As a consequence, Hollywood studios have little prospect of making money this year by exporting their films worldwide.

Conclusion here is that the Hollywood studio will not able to make money from export. Why ? because their revenue from the sales of exported movies will not be able to fill the hole that has been created by DVD Piracy related loses
To weaken - we need something that says - YES there is no chance of profit.
Any thing that does not contribute to prfiting the hollywood studio is our candidate for the right answer


A. $500 million represents a very small fraction of overseas profits. -- This says even after a loss of $500 Million , there will be handsome amount of profit left

B. New laws and heightened international enforcement aimed at this piracy were implemented in January of this year and have been effective.

This says loss was from last year and thins year loss will be far less because security is high. Hence there is high chance of profit

C. Even in countries where DVD piracy is widespread, theatrical first-run distribution is both very popular and profitable.
- This directly confirms proft

D. Last year, all films that were nominated for an Academy Award were known to have been pirated on DVD.

- This does not comment of profit at all. Academy Award winning movies may not be from hollywood studio and may not contribute to profit or loss of it atall.
Hence this is the ANSWER (D)

E. Domestic DVD sales were sharply higher last year; in the past, strong domestic sales have been an indicator of higher international DVD sales in the following year
-This says because of high domestic sale , a know sales pattern will increase international sale of exported movies. Hence profit is guranteed


Answer (D)

4. The amount of money estimated to be lost by Hollywood studios due to DVD piracy overseas increased to more
than $500 million last year. As a consequence, Hollywood studios have little prospect of making money this year
by exporting their films worldwide. All of the following, if true, weaken the argument except:

• $500 million represents a very small fraction of overseas profits.
Ofcourse this means even if the trend continues this year, the amount lost is very small in overall profit.. weakens

• New laws and heightened international enforcement aimed at this piracy were implemented in January of this year
and have been effective.
This tells us that new laws could have had an impact on the piracy and this loss may not happen this year.. Weakens

• Even in countries where DVD piracy is widespread, theatrical first-run distribution is both very popular and profitable.
This gives us reason to continue exporting dvds as the first -run distribution is profitable... Weakens

• Last year, all films that were nominated for an Academy Award were known to have been pirated on DVD.
Irrelevant, so does not Weakwn.... Answer

• Domestic DVD sales were sharply higher last year; in the past, strong domestic sales have been an indicator of
higher international DVD sales in the following year.
Again gives another reason to believe it will be profitable... Weakens conclusion

D

Hello chetan2u,

As per my understanding, option "D" strengthens the argument by saying that last year piracy of good movies was done, so sam can be expected.

Also, IMO option "E" is a weakener because dvd sales might have increased but we dont know whether they are strong or not. Thus we cant infer anything from this statement.

Please correct my understanding. I also chose "D" because of aforesaid reasoning.

Just wanna add my two cents on option (D)



Some people may assume that Academy Award is the most important factor determining DVD sales. But, as far as I'm concerned, this is not necessarily true in case of exporting films. Not sure whether you notice, but I see a lot success cases of overseas DVD sales whose explanation is sometimes just simply that the cultures, traditions, shooting scenes, etc. the movies delivered match local audience's interest. For example, a foreign film featuring host country's cultures and natural landscape may have a high chance of attracting a large number locals who are curious to see how their country looks like from perspective of foreigners. Therefore, I think "Academy Award" factor is "too narrow to be relevant" in this case.

Regarding option (E)



If you're wondering to what extent it is strong or not, then you could apply that thinking to options (B) and (C) too, e.g. whether new regulations will be strong enough to prevent DVD piracy??...

Maybe sometimes we do not need to think too much, because option (D) is more problematic, I think.

Perfectly summarised. Now I have a new point of view which i can use while solving other questions. Healthy discussions are always fruitful. +1

Hollywood is losing money to piracy: ~$500m last year.
Therefore we have little prospect to make money if we send our films worldwide.

Is that true? Can we not make any money by sending our films worldwide?

a) if we lost 500m but made 3bn, it still makes sense to export. Weakens!
b) if there is a crackdown on privacy, maybe losses will decrease. We should still export. Weakens!
c) hollywood may lose money from piracy, but still make a ton of money from first run showings. Weakens!
d) this just seems irrelevant, doesn’t weaken the argument.
e) we should export because we can expect a lot of sales (despite ongoing piracy). weakens!

Correct ans. D

For those whoa re struck between D and E
Here there is a difference between dvd sales and dvd piracy sales.
So E weakens the argument, making OA:D

In my opinion, D does not impact the argument.

We are already told the following in the argument: last year that there was an estimated 500 million dollars worth of DVD piracy. The author is assuming that what happened last year will continue into this year and harm any overseas money (profits) the studios might earn this year.

D tells us that all the films nominated for academy awards last year were pirated. The effect this information has is to just add a little more depth to what we already know: there was a certain amount of pirated DVDs last year.

Does the fact that all academy award nominated movies were pirated last year mean it will continue this year? And even if it does, do we know if this makes up a large portion of the overall profits the studios make?

It could be the case that most DVD sales overseas are Michael Bay action films, which are hardly ever nominated. On the other hand, the academy award DVDs might not constitute a significant portion of the profits. Even if they are pirated this year (which we do not know for sure), it could be the case that this has little to no effect on the studios overseas profits.

For these reasons (and others), I believe D does not impact the argument.

Posted from my mobile device

Hi guys, after reading all the posts, I realise that I misunderstood the passage.

This is how I understood it, can anyone explain where the lapse is please?


Hollywood lost money last year due to piracy overseas. As a result, they should not export any more films internationally because pirated versions will hamper their sales.

And so, I chose option B: This year, since piracy will be monitered and there will be laws to keep it in check, Hollywood's print of the movies will have to sell.

Therefore, Hollywood will definitely not face a loss as drastic as last year's (500 million $); and they will make money.


.