GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 20 Oct 2019, 12:08

Close

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
Your Progress

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Posts: 296
Location: Montreal, Canada
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 21 May 2019, 03:45
2
26
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

27% (02:05) correct 73% (02:16) wrong based on 698 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?


(A) The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.

(B) The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.

(C) Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.

(D) The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing, rather than on purchasing new merchandise.

(E) Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.

Originally posted by coffeeloverfreak on 11 Sep 2005, 14:59.
Last edited by Bunuel on 21 May 2019, 03:45, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Retired Moderator
avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1572
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2011, 23:31
1
bschool83 wrote:
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?

The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.
>It's not mentioned whether it's a short term or long term plan. Construction may cause temporary damage but long term benefits. Not a great weakener.

The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.
>This is an additional info unrelated to congestion. What if the passage talks about holiday shopping season itself. Clogging can hurt the stores in any season, more so during holiday shopping season. Ignore.

Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
>Correct. Even a small customer base can contribute to significant profits. Congestion could only be a remote possibility.

The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing rather than on purchasing new merchandise.
>Not mentioned in the passage whether purchasing new merchandise is more important than advertising and marketing. Who knows if the Rodway's stores already have surplus inventory and thus following this strategy. Not too strong to suggest an alternate cause for the stores' struggle.

Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
>Martin's stores may not be selling the stuff that Ipswich's customers need more, or there may be other factors that's compelling Ipswich's customers to choose Rodwell over Martin.



Rodway's stores are catering to Ipswich's customers' needs.
Ipswich's stores are catering to Martin's customers' needs.

"C" says it may not be the widening of road that's making Ipswich's stores more profitable, it could actually be the affluence of their Martn's customers that's effecting Ipswich's stores profitability. So, assuming the easing of congestion as a factor for profitability of Martins stores and taking an analogous corrective action could be a bad strategy for Rodway.

Ans: "C"
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 46
Schools: Kellogg
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Aug 2011, 03:30
1
fluke wrote:
bschool83 wrote:
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?

The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.
>It's not mentioned whether it's a short term or long term plan. Construction may cause temporary damage but long term benefits. Not a great weakener.

The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.
>This is an additional info unrelated to congestion. What if the passage talks about holiday shopping season itself. Clogging can hurt the stores in any season, more so during holiday shopping season. Ignore.

Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
>Correct. Even a small customer base can contribute to significant profits. Congestion could only be a remote possibility.

The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing rather than on purchasing new merchandise.
>Not mentioned in the passage whether purchasing new merchandise is more important than advertising and marketing. Who knows if the Rodway's stores already have surplus inventory and thus following this strategy. Not too strong to suggest an alternate cause for the stores' struggle.

Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
>Martin's stores may not be selling the stuff that Ipswich's customers need more, or there may be other factors that's compelling Ipswich's customers to choose Rodwell over Martin.



Rodway's stores are catering to Ipswich's customers' needs.

Ipswich's stores are catering to Martin's customers' needs.

"C" says it may not be the widening of road that's making Ipswich's stores more profitable, it could actually be the affluence of their Martn's customers that's effecting Ipswich's stores profitability. So, assuming the easing of congestion as a factor for profitability of Martins stores and taking an analogous corrective action could be a bad strategy for Rodway.

Ans: "C"


Somehow, I am not at all convinced with the approach followed to say C is a better option..

Premise says: Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin

Clearly, the profits have increased manifold only after the roads have been widened ..

The purchasing power of residents from Martin in option C is stated as a fact, which is independent of the time frame i.e. residents from Martin have always had higher purchasing power and will continue to have as compared to those in Ipswich ..
This means that widening of roads has actually helped in increasing profits .. Your thoughts ??

Further, I am not sure how can we infer the bold part above (Rodway's stores are catering to Ipswich's customers' needs)..

I say, that Ipswich and Roadway both are just small towns and residents from Martin are the sole customers for the stores in both the towns.. Can we refute this statement from the stimulus ??

Overall, I am not sure which is the right option, however, on the test day I would mark option D and move on...

P.S -> bschool83 dude ur questions r really like shot gun bullets .. dey claim victims at regular intervals .. :(
_________________
I was born intelligent but education ruined me !
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 171
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Aug 2011, 06:45
2
1
This question is a classic example of what I call... the 3C's rule "correlation causation caution!" i.e. when you see a correlation amounting to causation... there's something wrong.

Here Rodway's survival is correlated to Martin's by widening the roads from Ipswich. To weaken such conclusions, all you have to do is find a fault in the correlation.

What if Martin's stores were not profitable even after widening the road, then this is a faulty correlation.

Ans E does just that. E is the answer.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Jul 2011
Posts: 91
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Aug 2011, 10:39
The argument is : Widening the road to Ipswich will help in increasing the profits.
In my opinion, the correct answer would be the one which would say that the there is some other factor (and not the road) which is the reason for lower profits

I think only C and D make the cut. However, C is still in some way related to the road (as the residents of Martin have to come to Ipswich using the road).

So, D is the choice for me.

OA and OE please.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Feb 2010
Posts: 169
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: Northwestern (Kellogg) - Class of 2014
WE: Marketing (Computer Hardware)
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Aug 2011, 10:51
IndianExpress wrote:
The argument is : Widening the road to Ipswich will help in increasing the profits.
In my opinion, the correct answer would be the one which would say that the there is some other factor (and not the road) which is the reason for lower profits

I think only C and D make the cut. However, C is still in some way related to the road (as the residents of Martin have to come to Ipswich using the road).

So, D is the choice for me.

OA and OE please.


Just a slight correction, the argument is : Widening the road to Rodway from Ipswich will save the Rodway stores, which are struggling to survive.

The weakening answer will include something that either says the congestion isn't the reason why the stores are struggling to survive or it will say that widening the roads won't save the stores, which are struggling (implies to me significant increase in revenue or profit)
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Applying for 2012 B school admissions
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 109
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V35
GMAT 2: 760 Q50 V44
GPA: 3.6
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Aug 2011, 11:27
3
edoy56 wrote:
The weakening answer will include something that either says the congestion isn't the reason why the stores are struggling to survive or it will say that widening the roads won't save the stores, which are struggling (implies to me significant increase in revenue or profit)


Good analysis! However premise clearly states that "congestion is deterring potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores". As premises are considered true, we cannot weaken them. We can weaken the logical reasoning or the link between premises and conclusions or the conclusion itself. So, as per your analysis, only one weakening option remains: "or it will say that widening the roads won't save the stores, which are struggling ". Considering this, correct/incorrect choices become more evident.

My take on option C is:

Premise states that stores in Ipswich are thriving since the road between Ipswich and Martin was widened. (NOTE: no mention of Martin's stores in the premises)

Option C states that Martin's residents have much more purchasing power than Ipswich's residents. This implies that since the road between Ipswich and Martin was widened, Martin's residents were able to reach and purchase at Ipswich's stores, thus increasing Ipswich's stores' revenues. This in fact reinforces the premises, and hence actually strengthens the conclusion, that is based on a positive relation between widening of road (thus reducing congestion) and stores' revenues.

Having ruled out option C, E remains.
Conclusion: Widening Road => (alleviate congestion) => Increased Revenue of Rodway's stores

E states that widening of road didn't have a significant effect on Martin's stores, thus there is no reason to believe that widening of road will have a significant effect on Rodway's stores.
In short, option E is: Widening of Road --Not Always--> Significant Increase in Revenue

In cases of cause and effect, If A causes B, i.e., A->B, then this relationship is considered strict and binding. In all cases A should cause B, and to the same extent. E clearly weakens this causal relationship as stated in the argument, hence should be the answer.

Option D is out of scope as it doesn't refer to the reasoning used in the argument and states extraneous factors (such as advertising, merchandise etc.) that may or may not affect stores' revenues.
_________________
Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1093
Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Mar 2016, 08:58
1
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores.
The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive.
Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin.
Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?....i.e., Weaken

A. The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.
The road widening here will block one more additional lane of traffic which will add to current issue. But it is temporary and can favor the argument.

B. The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.......when they are profitable is not the concern as we should be able to clear traffic to make it comfortable for shoppers. Out of scope.

C. Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.......martin residents purchasing power have nothing to do with Rodway's as Martin's residents can go to Rodway to purchase products.

D. The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing rather than on purchasing new merchandise..............This is completely out of scope and does not affect the argument.

E. Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.............this slight increase in profits helped the stores in Ipswich to become successful while only slight increase in profits were experienced by Marint's stores. So in a way the widening of road can result in prosperity for stores of either Ipswich or Rodway or anything else(the road can act as aid in transporting the material on that road). Thus it is not sure that Rodway's stores can be saved as outcome is not sure.
Current Student
User avatar
B
Joined: 25 Feb 2014
Posts: 211
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
Reviews Badge
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Apr 2016, 03:02
3
Should be E.

Conclusion says that to alleviate congestetion and save Rodways stores, road from I to R should be widened. Evidence used is that businesses in Martin are thriving since the road from I to M was widened.

So assumption is that there is a causal relationship between widening of road from I to M and thriving businesses at M.

We need to weaken this causal connection.

E does that by suggesting that widening of road between I and R hardly affected the businesses at R.

Posted from my mobile device

Posted from my mobile device
_________________
Consider KUDOS if my post helped :)

I got the eye of the tiger, a fighter, dancing through the fire
'Cause I am a champion and you're gonna hear me roar
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jul 2015
Posts: 40
GPA: 3.8
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Reviews Badge
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Apr 2016, 00:08
Here is my take on this.
Question Type: Weaken
Conclusion: Road (I->R) should be widened to SAVE stores in R --> need to prove that it's not the case (little help in saving R-store or not at all)

Quote:
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?


(1) The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.
Irrelevant: Conclusion talking about end result not the process

(2) The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.
Irrelevant: We should weaken the conclusion (widen the road) not the additional information, which doesn't affect whether you do anything with the road or not

(3) Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
Irrelevant: We're talking about widen the road between I & R, not the M's purchasing power

(4) The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing, rather than on purchasing new merchandise.
Irrelevant: This could happen with or without the road affect --> neutral since lack of information

(5) Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
Could be: So similar situation happen from I->M while widen the road prove it does little help to increase the profit, so we can predict that same thing will happen with the widen road from I -> R: little affect on the store profit --> no help at all --> Weaken

So at the end, I think (E) is a suitable answer.
_________________
[4.33] In the end, what would you gain from everlasting remembrance? Absolutely nothing. So what is left worth living for?
This alone: justice in thought, goodness in action, speech that cannot deceive, and a disposition glad of whatever comes, welcoming it as necessary, as familiar, as flowing from the same source and fountain as yourself. (Marcus Aurelius)
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 556
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jun 2016, 12:28
2

The correct answer is E


This problem again reinstate the importance of reading the stimulus properly and getting the facts right

Lets break down the argument and see how clever the answer is

PREMISE 1) Roads From IPSWICH to MARTIN have been widened
PREMISE 2) Stores in IPSWICH are making profit. Many customers are visiting.

Ok. The widening of the roads should result in two way traffic .. Yes.. ??
Going from IPSWICH ----> MARTIN should be as convenient as travelling from MARTIN ---->IPSWICH since the width of the road will facilitate traffic in both direction

_____________________________________


I
P--------------->------------>---------M
S-----------<-------------<------------A
W--------------------------->---------R
I-----------<-------------<------------T
C----------------------------->--------I
H-----------<------------<------------N

________________________________________



PREMISE 3) THIS SHOULD WEAKEN THE CONCLUSION --> OPTION E -Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
CONCLUSION) To save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Now if widening the road between IPSWICH and MARTIN has caused MARTIN's customers to move to IPSWICH and only a little increase in MARTIN's store then IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT WIDENING THE ROAD BETWEEN RODWAY AND IPSWICH WILL CAUSE RODWAY'S CUSTOMERS TO TRAVEL TO IPSWICH. IN EVERY SCENARIO ITS IPSWICH THAT IS GAINING CUSTOMERS. CURRENTLY FROM MARTIN AND IF ROAD ARE BROADENED THEN IN FUTURE FROM RODWAY ALSO. MAY BE IPSWICH HAVE BETTER STORE.

Thus widening the road highway might actually complete destroy the Rodway stores by pulling customers away from Rodway to Ipswich.

Hence E is the correct weakener.

No other options does the trick.
Check by putting each option in place of PREMISE 3 and see how none of the other options weakens the conclusion.







The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently ovowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?

(1) The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.

(2) The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.

(3) Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.

(4) The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing, rather than on purchasing new merchandise.

(5) Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
_________________
Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 17 Sep 2015
Posts: 84
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jul 2016, 06:40
1
The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traffic, which deters potential customers from visiting Rodway's stores. The congestion has gotten so bad that many of the stores in Rodway are struggling to survive. Meanwhile, in Ipswich, the stores are thriving since they widened the road to Martin. Thus, to alleviate congestion and save Rodway's stores, the road between Ipswich and Rodway should be widened.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?

(1) The construction necessary to widen the road will block an additional lane of traffic, temporarily adding to the congestion.

(2) The stores in Rodway are only profitable during the holiday shopping season.

(3) Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.

(4) The owners of Rodway's stores are spending their revenue on advertising and marketing, rather than on purchasing new merchandise.

(5) Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.

Tough to chose between C and E but I went with E

The argument does not give us any info about the purchasing power (PP) of R. The if true options give us some idea about the PP of I and M. Since there is no info about the PP of R and hence no means to compare the PP of all 3 together, I decided to eliminate it

Selection of E) as others have pointed out, IF E) is considered true then we can safely assume that stores in I are highly attractive and pull away business from neighbouring cities such as M.
Widening of the road between I and R may actually be more detrimental than helpful for R.

hope my reasoning is sound.
_________________
You have to dig deep and find out what it takes to reshuffle the cards life dealt you
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2016
Posts: 30
Location: China
Concentration: Finance, Nonprofit
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V33
GMAT 2: 690 Q51 V31
GMAT 3: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.4
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jul 2016, 00:01
2
I first went for C, since the author applied a similarity to deduce another similarity, and the optimal way to weaken the conclusion is to find a dissimilarity between the counterparts.

In this question, two counterparts should be M (destination) and R (destination).

After carefully reviewing the argument, i found that it was not the case:
stimulus: widen the road from I to M, I thrived (I - starting city, not M).
Conclusion to be weakened: widen the road from I to R, R would be saved.

C: Martin is a thriving metropolis whose residents have several times the purchasing power of those of Ipswich.
C compared M with I, rather than M with R, thus C is extraneous to the conclusion.

E: Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
The widened road did not bring considerable profits to M - just a slight increase. So E told us that the implementation that widening the road from I to M would NOT result in M's thriving.
Consequently, the same implementation will NOT result in saving R - just similar slight increase.

Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.

Tks,
_________________
It's better to burn out than to fade away.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 24 Mar 2019
Posts: 46
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2019, 09:43
Choice E:Martin's stores have only experienced a slight increase in profits since the road from Ipswich was widened.
Still slight increase can save the stores which are struggling to survive.

Choice D is much better.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff   [#permalink] 21 May 2019, 09:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The highway from Ipswich to Rodway is currently overcrowded with traff

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne