It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 04:49

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 snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the

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

Hide Tags

6 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2012
Posts: 140

Kudos [?]: 276 [6], given: 37

GMAT ToolKit User
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2013, 07:03
6
This post received
KUDOS
33
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

36% (02:33) correct 64% (02:39) wrong based on 1698 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce-they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100- calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.
Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?
A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

I am lost!! Help with reasoning will be highly appreciated
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Please give Kudos if you like the post

Kudos [?]: 276 [6], given: 37

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 349

Kudos [?]: 64 [0], given: 41

Location: European union
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2013, 13:30
I would say C is a good answer. Busy young profesisonals dont have time to measure calories. so this supports the convenience option. At the same time it undermines the second reason because..one might assume busy young professionals are supposed to have self control...

Kudos [?]: 64 [0], given: 41

24 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1124

Kudos [?]: 3557 [24], given: 123

Location: United States
Premium Member
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2013, 17:49
24
This post received
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Very tricky question, IMO E is correct.

Fact: 100Calories packs cost more per ounce-than traditionally sized portions.
Fact: Consumers have been purchasing 100Calories pack with greater and greater frequency.

Explanation 1: Consumers are willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. ==> convenience is 1st priority.

Explanation 2: 100Calories pack represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages. ==> Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. However, if 100c pack stands beside a LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore the smaller one and pick up the bigger one.

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
Wrong. Out of scope.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
Wrong. Out of scope.

C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
Wrong. Good shell game. It maybe fits the first explanation, but It's wrong because "the first group to purchase" does not mean busy young professionals will keep their habit. They are just the group of people who always try "NEW stuffs" more frequently than other group of people.

D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
Wrong. Out of scope.

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.
Correct. Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. ==> If 100c pack stands beside LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore 100c pack. ==> E also undermines the 2nd explanation because if convenience is priority, customers should ignore the large sized portions to pick up the smaller sized packs.

Hope it's clear.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3557 [24], given: 123

3 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 15 Oct 2012
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: 5 [3], given: 0

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2013, 05:31
3
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
summer101 wrote:
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce-they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100- calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.
Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?
A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

I am lost!! Help with reasoning will be highly appreciated


Interesting question! Let's examine the argument first:
Observation: Though HCPs cost more per ounce than traditional snack packs, they are selling really well.
Reasoning 1: Consumers are probably willing to pay more to avoid measuring out their portions, and are relatively unconcerned about the size of the pack
Reasoning 2: HCPs represent the smallest snack pack sizes that look and feel 'substantial' enough to appeal to dieters without self-control
We need to pick out the answer choice that supports one of the 2 explanations and undermines the other.

A: This is a very specific case - HCPs sold in vending machines versus traditional packs sold in vending machines. Be very wary of such 'too narrow' answer choices. This does not fit our bill.
B: When such foods are consumed - does not help us.
C: This supports Reasoning 1 to some extent - busy professionals may not want the hassle of measuring out their portions. But this does not undermine Reasoning 2.
D: This is an explanation for why the companies that manufacture HCPs must charge more - does not help to strengthen/weaken the 2 explanations.
E: Correct. This choice has a clear connect to the appearance of HCPs, a point mentioned in Reasoning 2. It strengthens Reasoning 2 because it tells us that people may, in fact, be influenced by the 'substantial' feel of the HCPs. By themselves, the HCPs may have looked substantial, but next to traditional snack packs, they would look smaller. This is in line with Reasoning 2. This choice also undermines Reasoning 1: if consumers are willing to pay more to avoid measuring out their portions, this should be the case wherever the HCPs are displayed. But the sales of HCPs is poor when they are displayed next to traditional packs.
Hope this is clear now. :)

Kudos [?]: 5 [3], given: 0

9 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: 117 [9], given: 3

GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2013, 06:17
9
This post received
KUDOS
Analysis of argument:
1. Fast rise in production and sales of "100- Calorie packs” which provides exactly 100 calories per portion.
2. 100- Calorie packs costs more and sells for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions which are 2-3 times 100- Calorie packs.
3. First explanation of the rise in sales of "100- Calorie packs”: Consumers unconcerned with impression of the small packs and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions.
4. Another explanation of the rise in sales of "100- Calorie packs”: At least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, the 100- calorie pack still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.

Pre thinking:
The production of 100- Calorie packs is increasing despite of its high cost of production to the producer while selling at same price as traditional product. So producer must be able to sell large number of these to get more aggregate profit even though profit per unit is less. This becomes irrelevant because we are looking for consumer behavior and not production behavior.
The Sales of 100- Calorie is also on rise despite the fact that it sells for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions which are 2-3 times 100- Calorie packs.
So the consumers are using it increasingly and the only major difference from traditional product s is that the 100- Calorie packs which provides exactly 100 calories per portion.
So the reason for increase must be around the exact 100 calories per portion per portion which it provides.

The first explanation says that consumer is using it more often to avoid measuring out their portions. So the consumer is too busy to measure the portion they eat and can’t eat more than 100 calories.

The second explanation relies on the reason that it is getting popular because of dieters who lack self control and hence chooses 100- calorie pack to limit their consumption.

Answer choice analysis:

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
Incorrect: This is not supporting or undermining the argument but repeating the fact given in passage.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
Incorrect: Not related to any of the explanations. The explanations rely on either not wanting to measure or on dieters without self control.
C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
Incorrect: Supports the first explanation but doesn’t undermine the second one as it doesn’t say anything about dieters.
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
Incorrect: Explanations are not taking about manufacturers but about the users.

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.
Correct
The sales have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions shows that a big section people lack self control and will go for larger sized portion if displayed together. The second explanation talks about this behavior and hence is supported by this answer choice.

It also undermines the first explanation which says that consumer is using it more often to avoid measuring out their portions. Had that been the reason the sales of 100-calorie packs wouldn’t have gone down when displayed with traditional packs.

_________________

The Kudo please :)

Kudos [?]: 117 [9], given: 3

3 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2012
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 4 [3], given: 2

Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
GPA: 3.11
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2013, 20:29
3
This post received
KUDOS
Please correct me....
I have different understanding

"represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages."


It clearly states that dieters want to go for small packs and limit consumption of larger ones.
D.) small packs are not sold as high as large ones, if both are placed together. This donot undermine the explanation of quoted text as dieters would still prefer smaller ones(because they cannot control eating and same time want to limit their eating).
So, D is not the answer.

Even wague , B successfully eliminates the explanation that peopl go for small packs for convenience. If a larger number of consumer take small packs because they are already full after heavy meal, the second explanation is supported and first is undermnined

Kudos [?]: 4 [3], given: 2

1 KUDOS received
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 14

Kudos [?]: 24 [1], given: 309

Concentration: General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Dec 2013, 21:35
1
This post received
KUDOS
mbmanoj wrote:
D.) small packs are not sold as high as large ones, if both are placed together. This donot undermine the explanation of quoted text as dieters would still prefer smaller ones(because they cannot control eating and same time want to limit their eating).
So, D is not the answer.

Even wague , B successfully eliminates the explanation that peopl go for small packs for convenience. If a larger number of consumer take small packs because they are already full after heavy meal, the second explanation is supported and first is undermnined

I also feel the answer should be B

Kudos [?]: 24 [1], given: 309

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 28

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 21

Concentration: Operations, General Management
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Apr 2014, 05:56
how E undermines second??
E is undermining first explanation

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 21

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2014
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2014, 05:39
I think E is supporting the first explanation and undermining the second.
Explanation 1 says convenience is the reason and people are unconcerned about the relative size...and this is endorsed by the choice because if people are concerned of the size they would have not chosen bigger packs when placed near small 100 calorie packs.
Explanation 2 says dieters are concerned about controlling the quantity they eat so they prefer the small sized packs but the choice says the sales of big packs are increased when the shop has big packs so it undermines the fact that dieters are concerned about controlling the eating....

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2013
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 243

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2014, 17:43
Option E need not directly strengthen the second reasoning. If we can undermine the first reasoning and display with an evidence that consumers lack self control at stores where larger packs are placed beside 100cal packs then we actually strengthens Reasoning-2.

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 243

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Jul 2014
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT Date: 08-05-2014
GPA: 2.8
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2014, 06:51
Tricky question indeed.

There are 2 conclusions, and the question stem asks us to support one and weaken the other.

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.

The passages states that consumers are purchasing the large pack, even though they are costly, how customers make the payment is not discusses

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.

Passage does not state anything about the consumption.


C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.

Out of scope
D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.

Again out of scope

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

This one maintains consistency while strengthening one conclusion and undermining the other.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Expert Post
MBA Section Director
User avatar
D
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4696

Kudos [?]: 17717 [0], given: 1986

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
#Top150 CR: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Oct 2015, 21:44
Expert's post
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce - they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100-calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.

Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.

C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.

D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.
_________________

My GMAT Resources
V30-V40: How to do it! | GMATPrep SC | GMATPrep CR | GMATPrep RC | Critical Reasoning Megathread | CR: Numbers and Statistics | CR: Weaken | CR: Strengthen | CR: Assumption | SC: Modifier | SC: Meaning | SC: SV Agreement | RC: Primary Purpose | PS/DS: Numbers and Inequalities | PS/DS: Combinatorics and Coordinates

My MBA Resources
Everything about the MBA Application | Over-Represented MBA woes | Fit Vs Rankings | Low GPA: What you can do | Letter of Recommendation: The Guide | Indian B Schools accepting GMAT score | Why MBA?

My Reviews
Veritas Prep Live Online

Kudos [?]: 17717 [0], given: 1986

Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1201

Kudos [?]: 897 [0], given: 75

Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
#Top150 CR: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Oct 2015, 07:10
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion.

These packs cost substantially more as they sell for nearly same price as traditionally big sized portions but consumers have been purchasing them more.

  • One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions.
  • Another possible explanation is that 100-calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.


Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?

A. Consumers are willing to pay exactly the same price for 100-calorie packs sold in vending machine as for traditionally sized snack portions sold in vending machine.
This is already mentioned and does not affect any reason.

B. A large number of buyers of 100-calorie packs consume them as light desserts after large meals that have left them feeling too full for traditionally sized snack food.
This presents a different reason different from above two reasons. OFS

C. Although the 100-calorie packs have begun to sell well across a large variety of demographics, busy young professionals were the first group to purchase them frequently.
We are bothered about reasons not who are the purchasers and both the reasons specify dieting or measuring aspect but this indicates professional lifestyle as the reason.

D. Because the 100-calorie packs require more packaging per ounce of food than the traditionally sized portions do, manufacturers must charge more per ounce to make the same relative profit as on traditionally sized portions.
(This presents a different reason from manufacturer's point of view as in B. OFS)

E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are bestsellers at other stores.

I could not explain why E is correct and chose C falling into the trap. But pqhai nails it.

pqhai wrote:

Correct. Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. ==> If 100c pack stands beside LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore 100c pack. ==> E also undermines the 2nd explanation because if convenience is priority, customers should ignore the large sized portions to pick up the smaller sized packs.


Tricky question indeed.
_________________

The only time you can lose is when you give up. Try hard and you will suceed.
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

http://gmatclub.com/forum/rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html
When you post a question Pls. Provide its source & TAG your questions
Avoid posting from unreliable sources.


My posts
http://gmatclub.com/forum/beauty-of-coordinate-geometry-213760.html#p1649924
http://gmatclub.com/forum/calling-all-march-april-gmat-takers-who-want-to-cross-213154.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/possessive-pronouns-200496.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/double-negatives-206717.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-greatest-integer-function-223595.html#p1721773
https://gmatclub.com/forum/improve-reading-habit-233410.html#p1802265

Kudos [?]: 897 [0], given: 75

1 KUDOS received
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10134

Kudos [?]: 271 [1], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2015, 23:08
1
This post received
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 271 [1], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Re: #Top150 CR: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Nov 2015, 19:36
E. Sales of 100-calorie packs have been uniformly poor at stores where they are displayed alongside traditionally sized portions, even for the same snacks whose 100-calorie packs are best sellers at other stores.


Case1: store has both packs side by side. So X goes in and see both and as per E ,X picks larger one

reason 1- not valid

rason 2- valid because X does not have self control ( really!!!)

Case 2: Store has only 100 calorie pack. So X goes in and pick 100 pack.

Reason 1- Holds good else X should have got the other one

Reason 2 – I feel it holds good either. It can be a reason to avoid the big packet.


Confused!!!

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

1 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 1617

Kudos [?]: 1012 [1], given: 81

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2016, 11:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
8
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production and sales of "100- Calorie packs," individually wrapped portions of snack foods sized to provide exactly 100 calories per portion. These packs cost substantially more per ounce-they sell for nearly same price as traditionally sized portions, which are typically two to three times their size - but consumers have been purchasing them with greater and greater frequency. One possible explanation is convenience: Consumers may be relatively unconcerned with their subjective impression of the small packs, and willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. Another possible explanation is that 100- calorie pack, at least in the case of snacks for which it has sold well, represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages.

Which of the following, if true, would support one of the given explanation and undermine the other?

A. A substantial percentage of the market for 100-calorie packs consists of parents who put them into their children’s school lunches .

B. Sales of 100-calorie packs for nuts such as almonds and cashews , which are so nutrient- dense that such packs contain only ten to twelve nuts on average , have been extremely poor and have remained so even as the sales of other 100-calorie packs have exploded.

C. In several studies , subjects who ate a 100 – calorie pack of a given snack felt the same reduction in appetite , after 30 minutes , as those who traditionally sized portion of the same snack .

D . Because the 100-calorie portions are individually wrapped , they will not go stale or spoil before consumers can eat them .

E . Manufacturers seal air into the packages along with the snacks , both to protect the snacks from being crushed and to make the packs appear larger .
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Kudos [?]: 1012 [1], given: 81

3 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 362

Kudos [?]: 54 [3], given: 17

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, International Business
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2016, 13:18
3
This post received
KUDOS
Fact: 100Calories packs cost more per ounce-than traditionally sized portions.
Fact: Consumers have been purchasing 100Calories pack with greater and greater frequency.

Explanation 1: Consumers are willing to pay more to avoid having to measure out their portions. ==> convenience is 1st priority.

Explanation 2: 100Calories pack represents the smallest portion that still looks and feels "substantial" enough to appeal to dieters who lack the self control to limit their consumption of snacks from larger packages. ==> Because 100C pack is large enough so even if it stands alone, it still attracts dieters. However, if 100c pack stands beside a LARGER sized portion, dieters will ignore the smaller one and pick up the bigger one.

B?


Sent from my iPad

Kudos [?]: 54 [3], given: 17

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 06 Jul 2015
Posts: 25

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 9

Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2016, 13:36
C ) In several studies , subjects who ate a 100 – calorie pack of a given snack felt the same reduction in appetite , after 30 minutes , as those who traditionally sized portion of the same snack .

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 9

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3200

Kudos [?]: 3522 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2016, 14:54
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
hari1985 wrote:
C ) In several studies , subjects who ate a 100 – calorie pack of a given snack felt the same reduction in appetite , after 30 minutes , as those who traditionally sized portion of the same snack .


The correct answer choice should support one of the explanations and oppose the other. The two explanations are:
1. Convenience of not having to measure.
2. Appealing look and feel of the pack.

Now do you think C could be correct?

(not revealing answer choice or explanation before the scheduled date of publishing of answer.)

Kudos [?]: 3522 [1], given: 22

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Jun 2014
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 76

GPA: 3.6
WE: Operations (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2016, 23:51
E)Manufacturers seal air into the packages along with the snacks , both to protect the snacks from being crushed and to make the packs appear larger.
supports the first explanation (don't have to measure)
opposes 2nd (packs appear larger)

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 76

Re: The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the production   [#permalink] 26 Jul 2016, 23:51

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 34 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

The snack food market has recently seen an explosion in the

  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®.