Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to evaluate your current skill level, learn process skills, and solve through tough Arithmetic questions
Nov 2112:00 PM EST
-11:59 PM EST
Don’t miss Target Test Prep’s biggest sale of the year! Grab 25% off any Target Test Prep GMAT plan during our Black Friday sale. Just enter the coupon code BLACKFRIDAY25 at checkout to save up to $400.
Nov 2310:00 AM EST
-11:59 PM EST
Don't miss Manhattan Prep's biggest sale of the year! Use code SALE25 to save 25% on GMAT prep.- Nov 30
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test. 
Nov 3001:00 PM EST
-02:00 PM EST
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of how students should study. So, it's no wonder that more and more Target Test Prep students are scoring super high on the GMAT.
15 Jul 2014, 08:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
57% (01:53) correct
43%
(02:04)
wrong
based on 327
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
This past year, Jack's Packaged Goods launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its packaged beef jerkies. At the end of the past calendar year, Jack's sold 5 million packs of beef jerkies compared to the 4 million sold during the previous year, an increase directly attributable to new customers brought in by the campaign. Profits from the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Jack's economic interests.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) Sales of packaged beef jerkies account for a relatively small percentage of Jack's Packaged Goods' profits.
(B) Most of the people who bought Jack's packaged beef jerkies for the first time as a result of the compaign were already loyal customers of other Jack's products.
(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Jack's packaged beef jerkies than did the campaign Jack's Packaged Goods launched last year.
(D) Jack's made money on sales of packaged beef jerkies last year.
(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of packaged beef jerkies.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) Sales of packaged beef jerkies account for a relatively small percentage of Jack's Packaged Goods' profits.
(B) Most of the people who bought Jack's packaged beef jerkies for the first time as a result of the compaign were already loyal customers of other Jack's products.
(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Jack's packaged beef jerkies than did the campaign Jack's Packaged Goods launched last year.
(D) Jack's made money on sales of packaged beef jerkies last year.
(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of packaged beef jerkies.
HardWorkBeatsAll
Joined: 17 Aug 2015
Last visit: 19 Jul 2020
Posts: 90
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 341
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Duke '19 (II)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 4
WE:Information Technology (Finance: Investment Banking)
08 Jan 2016, 00:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
Confused between C and E. Why not C? (also D, for that matter)
08 Jan 2016, 01:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
HardWorkBeatsAll
Confused between C and E. Why not C? (also D, for that matter)
Hi,
lets work on the gist of para..
1)An add campaign was launched to increase sale of some beef product..
2)it resulted in an increase in number of customers but could not offset the cost of ad campaign.
3) the argument concludes that the ad campaign was not of use..
We have to weaken the argument..
since you have asked about C,D and E, lets see these 3 choices..
(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Jack's packaged beef jerkies than did the campaign Jack's Packaged Goods launched last year.
The Q is talking of that particular ad campaign, so we can ,in a way, say it is out of context.
But we can draw an analogy between the two ad campaigns to be able to eliminate it convincingly..
the choice tells us that less expensive, fewer new customers..But there is no correlation of expense and profit in the two different scenarios
- It is possible that it, like the ad campaign undertaken, could not offset the expense incurred.
or, it could have offset the expense..
if it said that "a more expensive campaign could get fewer coustomers": it could have weakened, depending on other choices..
(D) Jack's made money on sales of packaged beef jerkies last year.
totally out of context..
we are not told that this occured only last year and not the preceding years
(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of packaged beef jerkies.
CORRECT..
Here it gives us a reason to weaken the argument..
If, inspite of decline , the company could connect 1 million customers, the ad campaign has been a grand success and thus author's arguement is not valid
Hope it helped
