It is currently 19 Feb 2018, 02:23

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it

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

Hide Tags

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 52
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2008, 03:14
2
This post received
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

76% (01:21) correct 24% (01:33) wrong based on 729 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.

Which of followings, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?

(A) The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.

(B) Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.

(C) The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.

(D) If the grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville

(E) Closure of the Grenville would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by hazelnut on 25 Jul 2017, 06:59, edited 2 times in total.
OA Added
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 27 May 2008
Posts: 540
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2008, 03:27
fiesta wrote:
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Which of followings, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville
E. Closure of the Grenville would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.


E. Gives us another reason why OLEX is not closing the Grenville refinery.... social concern is not the only reason ...
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 428
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2008, 03:45
fiesta wrote:
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Which of followings, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville
E. Closure of the Grenville would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.


IMO E)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 295
Location: Hungary
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2008, 05:59
Yes, very clear E.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 52
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2008, 06:26
Ok, OA: E
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1476
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2010, 06:40
And why not D?
D explains that the job losses are not a problem.
please clarify.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 100
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2010, 07:54
I am with E too.. Thats the only option that says the company didn't move because of cost reasons and not because of social reasons.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 413
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2010, 08:27
E
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 413
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2010, 08:35
E
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 297
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2010, 01:50
i go with E too!
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1466
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2010, 06:58
E is best because OLEX has decided to run the company not because of social concerns but because it will have to bear enormous cost of cleanup in case if they closed.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 166
WE 1: 3 (Mining Operations)
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2010, 00:33
E is best.
_________________

Regards,
Invincible...:)
"The way to succeed is to double your error rate."
"Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit."

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 105
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2010, 09:34
E is best answer
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10320
Premium Member
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2014, 20:53
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Nov 2013
Posts: 60
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Sep 2015, 23:41
1
This post received
KUDOS
noboru wrote:
And why not D?
D explains that the job losses are not a problem.
please clarify.


I eliminated D using this reasoning -
given in D - job opening at G would go to T, to the extent possible.

lets say 100% of jobs can be moved to T...then why is the G refinery not getting closed? there will be no impact to lives/jobs of people.
OR
lets say only 1% of jobs can be moved to T...in this case there will be an impact. Due to the social concern the company may not be closing the G refinery.

hence it does not weaken the argument's main point - social concern outweighs the desire for profits.

it would help if somebody can validate this reasoning..thanks
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Posts: 70
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Apr 2016, 06:29
Hi

I wanted to know why is A incorrect?
Afterall if that location provides marginal profits then why would someone shut it down.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Oct 2015
Posts: 361
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 3.93
WE: Account Management (Education)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Apr 2016, 13:30
sa18 wrote:
Hi

I wanted to know why is A incorrect?
Afterall if that location provides marginal profits then why would someone shut it down.

A is NOT the answer because of the presence of E
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 268
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: 314 Q167 V147
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jan 2017, 08:14
In my 2 cents,
A is not correct.The reason of consolidation is solely due to the cost cutting;we know nothing about the profit condition of these two refineries.All of the refineries could generate moderate profit!! hence,it is unjustifiable.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Jul 2016
Posts: 57
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: AGSM '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GPA: 3.5
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jan 2017, 12:29
fiesta wrote:
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Which of followings, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville
E. Closure of the Grenville would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.

Option E clearly says that there were additional economic reasons due to which the Grenville refinery was not closed.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 07 Dec 2016
Posts: 45
Reviews Badge
Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2017, 17:10
E - provides another reason i.e. X does not cause Y but A causes Y
_________________

Cheers!
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!! :beer

Re: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it   [#permalink] 26 Mar 2017, 17:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.