The XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile

Question

The XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile, because insurance companies pay less, on average, to replace a stolen XCT than a stolen ZNK. Surprisingly, the average amount insurance companies will pay to repair a car involved in a collision is typically higher for the XCT than for the ZNK. One insurance expert explained that repairs to XCT automobiles are especially labor-intensive, and labor is a significant factor in collision repair costs.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the insurance expert's explanation?

A. ZNK automobiles are involved in accidents more frequently than XCT automobiles.
B. The cost of routine maintenance for the ZNK is about the same as for the XCT.
C. There are more automobile mechanics who specialize in XCT repairs than in ZNK repairs.
D. The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.
E. XCT automobiles are more likely to be stolen than ZNK automobiles.

ID: 500110
CR12721.02

HaileyCusimano · Accepted Answer

Hi  prakhar992 ! Happy to lend a hand! ( ShreyKapil08  - it looks like this might address your concern as well!)

Here, we're looking to strengthen the insurance expert's explanation as to why XCT repairs are more expensive despite the fact that they are considered less valuable vehicles than ZNK. So, we want something that tells us that the labor-intensive nature of the XCT as compared to the ZNK aligns with the fact that the ZNK is considered more valuable between the two.

(B) The cost of routine maintenance for the ZNK is about the same as for the XCT.  This does not address why "repairs to XCT automobiles are especially labor-intensive, and labor is a significant factor in collision repair costs" addresses the apparent paradox between the value of XCT vs. ZNK as compared to the repair costs of the two. Something being the same between the two cannot feasibly address the difference between value and repair costs

However, with  (D) The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.  This aligns with the insurance expert's explanation. If the ease of repair is part of what drives the value of the vehicle, it would make sense that because XCT automobiles are more labor-intensive, they would carry higher repair costs but a lower value.

So, we needed something that reinforces the explanation that the labor-intensity of the XCT explains why it costs more to repair but has a lower cost as compared to the ZNK. Only (D) addresses why higher repair costs would align with a lower vehicle value.

I hope this helps! Feel free to let me know if you have any follow-up questions!

KarishmaB · Answer

The argument gives a paradox:
Side1: Insurance companies pay less to replace a stolen XCT than a stolen ZNK. 
Side 2: Insurance companies pay more to repair XCT involved in a collision than they do for ZNK.

This is a paradox, right? They pay less to replace but more to repair. An expensive vehicle's price would be high and repair charges would be more too.

Expert resolves it: Repairs to XCT automobiles are especially labor-intensive, and labor is a significant factor in collision repair costs.

So we find out that repairs to XCT are labour intensive. Labor forms a big part of repair costs. That would explain why XCT repair costs are higher. What else can we say to strengthen this resolution?

D. The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.

XCT is more labour intensive and hence more expensive to repair. So ZNK is less labour intensive to repair. This factor (less labour intensive) adds to the value of ZNK. It makes the ZNK more desirable and hence more expensive. That is why cost of replacing a ZNK is higher and the insurance companies pay more to replace a stolen ZNK. 
It all makes sense now. The paradox is resolved.

sauravleo123 · Answer

The XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile, because insurance companies pay less, on average, to replace a stolen XCT than a stolen ZNK. Surprisingly, the average amount insurance companies will pay to repair a car involved in a collision is typically higher for the XCT than for the ZNK. One insurance expert explained that repairs to XCT automobiles are especially labor-intensive, and labor is a significant factor in collision repair costs.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the insurance expert's explanation?

A) ZNK automobiles are involved in accidents more frequently than XCT automobiles.

B) The cost of routine maintenance for the ZNK is about the same as for the XCT.

C) There are more automobile mechanics who specialize in XCT repairs than in ZNK repairs.

D) The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.

E) XCT automobiles are more likely to be stolen than ZNK automobiles.

What is the gap in the argument? XCT are less valuable than ZNK, but repairs are much more expensive. What could fill in this gap? Anything that suggests XCT repairing is more expensive than ZNK.
A. More frequent accidents does not explain why ZNK is cheaper to repair.
B. If anything this statement is neutral.
C. If there are more mechanics, repairs should be cheaper. Weakens.
D. Correct. This suggests XCT is more expensive to repair.
E. Irrelevant
D is correct

prakhar992 · Answer

Hello  VeritasPrepHailey

I hope that you are doing well in this time of pandemic. Can you please explain me this question? 
I was confused between option B and option D.

Option B. The cost of routine maintenance for the ZNK is about the same as for the XCT.

It means that we are keeping all the other factors same. So, there is no doubt that there could be other factors.

Option D. The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.

Ease of repair is strengthening the argument but the statement “one factor that adds to their value.” seems irrelevant.

Please explain.

ashmit99 · Answer

Hello experts,

D. The ease of repair of ZNK automobiles is one factor that adds to their value.

I get why all the options except D are wrong. But I didn't get the logic why D is correct. Could you please help me explain why D is correct?

C. There are more automobile mechanics who specialize in XCT repairs than in ZNK repairs.

Also, I rejected option C because I believe C is a mild weakener. I think if there are more specialized mechanics for XCT than for ZNK, then it would cost less for a repair of an XCT, because the supply of XCT mechanics is more than ZNK mechanics. Am I correct? If not, could you please share your reason to reject C?

ChiranjeevSingh   GMATNinja   VeritasKarishma   AndrewN   Skywalker18   AjiteshArun

Thank you in advance!

KarishmaB · Answer

Assuming all else is same for them, more specialised mechanics will mean lower labour costs. If supply is low, price is high.

Option (C) certainly doesn't help our explanation of "high labour costs because of labour intensive work". Whether it weakens much is a bit questionable. Even if many specialised mechanics are available, if the work needs many hours (labour intensive), it will become expensive.

Sneha2021 · Answer

KarishmaB 
Hi Karishma, 
Why A is incorrect?
A) ZNK automobiles are involved in accidents more frequently than XCT automobiles. 
Because we are trying to strengthen the expert explanation that "repairs to XCT automobiles are especially labor-intensive, and labor is a significant factor in collision repair costs". A is irrelevant bcz it doesn't mention anything related to why repair cost is high.
Am I correct? Please help.
Thanks in advance!

KarishmaB · Answer

Yes. (A) provides no support to the given reason - labour intensive. Also, the frequency of their accidents is irrelevant to why insurance ends up paying more for repair of XCT. We are talking about average amount so more incidents will not lead to higher amount. In any case we are given that ZNK is involved in more accidents, not XCT.
So all in all, totally irrelevant.

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  avigutman  - i chose D for this.

I am curious however, if the following were strengtheners

In both of the answer choices - the answer only strengthens the insurance experts' explanation (last sentence of argument). These two answers DONT EXPLAIN why ZNK automobiles are considered more valuable necessarily.

I would select (D1) and (D2)

I dont think the answer HAS TO TIE BACK to why ZNK automobiles are more valuable specifically.

avigutman · Answer

jabhatta2  Is the insurance expert trying to explain only why  insurance companies will pay more to repair XCT than ZNK ? If so, you're right.
On the other hand, if the insurance expert is trying to explain why   the cheaper car is more expensive  to repair , then you're wrong.
Which do you think it is, and why?

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  avigutman  - between the 2 mentioned, i thought the first.

I thought the insurance experts' explanation was to explain this statement specifically

I did not think the insurance experts' explanation was to explain away the  paradox mentioned here , nor the paradox mentioned in the pink above (i personally dont even think the statement in pink is a paradox but that issue is for another train of thought)

Furthermore the question stem - is asking to strengthen the insurance expert's explanation. The question stem doesnt seem to be asking about the paradox

avigutman · Answer

That's a problem,  jabhatta2 . Firstly, the paradox you linked to is the same as the pink above.
Secondly, the fact that you don't see it as a paradox is likely contributing to your confusion here.
Thirdly, the most important word in the passage is "surprisingly". That word is driving the need for an explanation by an insurance expert.
If you don't see a paradox, that implies that you don't see the reasoning for the use of the word "surprisingly".
So, I suggest that we dig into the paradox now. You don't find it surprising that a cheaper car costs more to repair? To be clear, we're not talking about maintenance costs - we're talking about repairing a car after it was involved in a collision. Surely you'd be surprised if a Porsche was cheaper to repair than a Toyota, no?

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  avigutman  – I did not find it SO surprising. I agree that if a Porsche collides and a Toyota collides – the repair cost of a Porsche will be higher.

But the argument is talking about  ‘how much will insurance companies pay to repair a car involved in a collision'...  So, it depends on one’s insurance plan.

Maybe the Porsche driver has a very basic insurance plan (so the Porsche driver has to pay 75 % out of pocket and insurance company pays 25 %) whereas the Toyota driver has a full coverage insurance plan (the Toyota driver has to 0 % out of pocket and the insurance company pays 100 % )

Regardless, the insurance expert put forth  another  reason for this surprising phenemona (Which also makes sense to me)

jabhatta2 · Answer

^^^

So when asked to strengthen the expert's reasoning, any of these can be strengtheners in my view

I think ALL of these strengtheners explain the paradox in pink " the cheaper car is more expensive to repair"

avigutman · Answer

Yes,  jabhatta2 , this would be a good answer: "On average, deductibles on XCT and ZNK are the same." because it  eliminates an alternative explanation  for why the cheaper car is more expensive to repair.
With (b) and (c), however, I'm left wondering:  why, then, is XCT less valuable than ZNK?  That part isn't explained by (b) and (c). We of course know in real life that Porsche is more expensive than a Toyota, and we know why (luxury brand, better service, more expensive materials, etc) but we don't know anything about XCT and ZNK.

I've seen you use this type of reasoning before (on the argument about heart disease and immune systems). You can't use individual differences to explain group differences. Your explanation only works if we can generalize that,  on average, Porsche owners have higher deductibles than Toyota owners .

jabhatta2 · Answer

Hi  avigutman  - the yellow surprised me.

With (b) and (c), why are you still left wondering  why, then, is XCT less valuable than ZNK?

To me, the reason why XCT is cheaper is clearly mentioned in the premise { insurance companies pay  less , on average, to replace a  stolen  XCT than a  stolen  ZNK }.

XCT being cheaper compared to ZNK has to do with   replacement   cost and nothing to do with   repair  costs

Even with (b) and (c) - XCT being cheaper than ZNK makes sense to me (because  replacement  cost of XCT is lower compared to  replacement  cost of ZNK)

avigutman · Answer

jabhatta2  
Why do insurance companies pay less, on average, to replace a stolen XCT than a stolen ZNK? Because the XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile.
Why is the XCT automobile considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile? Because insurance companies pay less, on average, to replace a stolen XCT than a stolen ZNK.
This is circular logic. We never got an actual reason for these facts. The correct answer choice does give us one factor that adds to ZNK's value.

Jayshah1997 · Answer

Can you please help me understand how to eliminate C
This being a strengthened question, directly links to the conclusion, if XCT is more labour intensive then there would be more people who specialize. Had it been automated then due to lower jobs available there won't be many mechanics who specialize in XCT.

KarishmaB · Answer

Option (C) does not support the explanation. What would a supporter of the explanation do? It would make it more likely that the explanation given is the actual explanation for the paradox.

What is the paradox? That XCT repairs are more expensive but the replacement is cheaper.

The explanation given is "that repairs of XCT are labour intensive and labour is a significant factor of the total cost." 
We are given that XCT repairs are labour intensive. So it does explain why repair costs are higher for XCT. Option (C) says that there are more mechanics for XCT. That makes sense from what is given to us. If XCT repairs involves more people, there will be more people trained to do XCT repairs. But are we questioning whether XCT repairs are labour intensive or involves more people? No. We are questioning, whether this is the reason why XCT repairs are more expensive but XCT replacement is cheaper. Option (D) tells us that easier repairs makes ZNK more expensive. Then it certainly seems likely that the way to resolve our paradox is the labour intensive repairs issue of XCT which doesn't exist in ZNK.

The XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The XCT automobile is considered less valuable than the ZNK automobile

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards