The extremely high cost of running a world class zoo is limiting what animals are seen by the public. A few, very wealthy families now determine what animals can be acquired and seen. Zoo administrators should choose what animals are displayed. If we reduce the budget so that the zoo is supported only by ticket sales and gift shop receipts, the public will see less exotic animals. Which statement below, if true, would weaken the argument? (A) The combination of ticket sales and gift shop receipts cannot match the amount of money donated by wealthy families. (B) Wealthy families will stop supporting the zoo if they are denied all control over how their money is used. (C) Without the support of wealthy families, the zoo cannot afford to produce any new exhibits and will have to sell some animals. (D) Some zoos have active breeding programs and literally “grow their own” animals. (E) Some people go to the zoo regularly—not to see specific animals or new exhibits. Source: Nova GMAT Difficulty Level: 750

The language of the question is all over the place and a bit of a mess however it actually makes sense ( can't say if it is a gmat like question but a good one nonetheless) Question simplified - rich people donating money get to decide what animals are displayed but if we lower budget and rely on tickets and gift shop PEOPLE WILL GET TO SEE THE ANIMAL THEY WANT TO SEE AND NOT THE ONES DONORS DECIDE UPON WHICH ARE EXOTIC. ( it is fair to say question was not framed right ) C) is the only option that says that still might not work because without that money some animals will be sold and won't be able to GET NEW EXHIBITS which are needed to get animals people want to see.