It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 06:27

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

To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Location: san jose , CA
To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 01:06
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:36) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

7. To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one must have a net worth of over ten million dollars and must not have any connections to the entertainment industry. Robert Chase, the publishing magnate, has a net worth of 5 billion dollars and chase has not financed any Hollywood movies, so he must be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is the part of evidence in support of this argument; the second is the conclusion that could not be drawn from all evidence that the argument contains.

(B) The first is the first-evidence that supports this argument; the second is the mainpoint that must be drawn from all evidence that the argument includes.

(C) The first is the one fact of two that argument includes; the second is the conclusion that could be drawn from this passage.

(D) The first is the background that is necessary for this argument; the second is the conclusion that is not drawn only from the first.

(E) The first is the cause that the argument includes; the second is the effect that can be drawn only from this cause.
_________________

---- Hero never chooses Destiny
Destiny chooses Him ......

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4284

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 06:45
I had a hard time choosing between B and C but I'll pick C
In B, I don't like the fact that the first bold-face is "the first evidence". Also, the second boldface is more like a conclusion from the passage, not the "mainpoint". The first boldface, along with the first sentence, must each be facts that make it that you can conclude the second BF.
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 50

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

Location: Seoul, South Korea
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 19:04
I'd like to vote for A.

"must not have any connections to the entertainment industry" =/= "chase has not financed any Hollywood movies"

Hollywood movies cannot cover the entertainment industy.
The conclusion is based on weak examples.

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 10

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 20:03
I'll vote for (C)

(C) is true since the first sentence has the one fact of two that argument includes, while the other statement is not against the second primise. Therefore, the conclusion could be drawn.

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 391

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

Location: Bangalore, India
Re: Boldface CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 23:06
I am going ahead with A.
The conclusion drawn from the two evidences given in the first two sentences, has some loop-holes. Does no connection to the entertainment industry mean 'not fiancing hollywood movies' alone? He may have some friends in the Hollywood. So, I go for A.

rahul wrote:
7. To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one must have a net worth of over ten million dollars and must not have any connections to the entertainment industry. Robert Chase, the publishing magnate, has a net worth of 5 billion dollars and chase has not financed any Hollywood movies, so he must be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is the part of evidence in support of this argument; the second is the conclusion that could not be drawn from all evidence that the argument contains.

(B) The first is the first-evidence that supports this argument; the second is the mainpoint that must be drawn from all evidence that the argument includes.

(C) The first is the one fact of two that argument includes; the second is the conclusion that could be drawn from this passage.

(D) The first is the background that is necessary for this argument; the second is the conclusion that is not drawn only from the first.

(E) The first is the cause that the argument includes; the second is the effect that can be drawn only from this cause.

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Location: san jose , CA
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Oct 2004, 23:56
Sorry folks i don't have the OA for this question .

i chose A
_________________

---- Hero never chooses Destiny
Destiny chooses Him ......

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 606

Kudos [?]: 153 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2004, 05:13
I choose C for the same reason as Paul. The second bold sentence looks more like a conclusion than a mainpoint.

Kudos [?]: 153 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 42

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2004, 15:15
C. 1st bf is more like specific/qualified evidence and the 2nd bf the conclusion.
A contradicts the drawn conclusion.

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 40

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2004, 23:34
My choice is A

the first BF provides an evidence which supports the argument

however, the conclusion drawn in second BF cannot be absolutely true
becoz, not financing hollywood movies does not mean that Chase doesnt have any connections to the entertainment industry

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 40

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2004, 23:35
My choice is A

the first BF provides an evidence which supports the argument

however, the conclusion drawn in second BF cannot be absolutely true
becoz, not financing hollywood movies does not mean that Chase doesnt have any connections to the entertainment industry

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 3

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2004, 08:25
Was wavering between A and D, but will will pick A...

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
Posts: 150

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Location: Dallas, TX
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Oct 2004, 15:36
I'm taking C, the second seems more like a conclusion drawn from the facts presented.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Re: Boldface CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Oct 2004, 19:57
rahul wrote:
7. To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one must have a net worth of over ten million dollars and must not have any connections to the entertainment industry. Robert Chase, the publishing magnate, has a net worth of 5 billion dollars and chase has not financed any Hollywood movies, so he must be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is the part of evidence in support of this argument; the second is the conclusion that could not be drawn from all evidence that the argument contains.

(B) The first is the first-evidence that supports this argument; the second is the mainpoint that must be drawn from all evidence that the argument includes.

(C) The first is the one fact of two that argument includes; the second is the conclusion that could be drawn from this passage.

(D) The first is the background that is necessary for this argument; the second is the conclusion that is not drawn only from the first.

(E) The first is the cause that the argument includes; the second is the effect that can be drawn only from this cause.


I would pick A for the following reasons. First the conclusion that Robert chase must be admitted into the club cannot be drawn from the evidence given. The evidence given in this argument is that for somebody to be admitted into the club, the person must possess two things, one must have a net worth of over ten million dollars and must not have any connections to the entertainment industry. It certainly does not lead us to conclude that anybody who meet this conclusion has to be admitted.

Secondly the first boldfaced is a statement uopn which the author stands to draw an invalid conclusion and it is thus serve as an evidence.

thus A is the possible answer to this question.

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 413

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Location: Lungi
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Nov 2004, 03:48
I will go for A.

Robert meets the first condition of 10 million dollars, but may not be meet the second requirement (he may have other connections in entertainment industry apart from not financing any hollywood movies).

so he must be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club.

is a conclusion which may not be drawn from the given evidences the argument contains.

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 721

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

Location: Milwaukee
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2005, 22:16
I am leaning towards A as well?. What do you guys say?. HongHu? Paul?
_________________

Praveen

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2228

Kudos [?]: 386 [0], given: 0

Re: Boldface CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2005, 22:47
Principle: To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one must have a net worth of over ten million dollars and must not have any connections to the entertainment industry.
Fact/evidence: Robert Chase, the publishing magnate, has a net worth of 5 billion dollars and chase has not financed any Hollywood movies,
Conclusion: so he must be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club.

This question is a little strange because it kind of combines two type of questions into one. The first type question is to find the roles of BFs, the second type is to determine whether the conclusion can be drawn from the evidences and premises.

(A) The first is the part of evidence in support of this argument; the second is the conclusion that could not be drawn from all evidence that the argument contains.
The first BF is obviously the evidence and the second BF is obviously the conclusion. Since not financing Hollywood movies doesn't mean not have any other connections to the entertainment industry, so the conclusion is one that cannot be drawn from the evidence.
Correct answer.

(B) The first is the first-evidence that supports this argument; the second is the mainpoint that must be drawn from all evidence that the argument includes.
First, the second BF cannot be drawn from the evidences. Second, what does "first-evidence" mean here? Does it imply there's another evidence? Obviously there aren't any more evidences.

(C) The first is the one fact of two that argument includes; the second is the conclusion that could be drawn from this passage.
Again, first conclusion cannot be drawn. Second there isn't a one of two facts.

(D) The first is the background that is necessary for this argument; the second is the conclusion that is not drawn only from the first.
The main thing is that first BF is not simply the background. The word "only" also does not sound right.

(E) The first is the cause that the argument includes; the second is the effect that can be drawn only from this cause.
Well it's not exactly cause and effect, especially when you can't draw the conclusion from the evidence.

(A)

Kudos [?]: 386 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 721

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

Location: Milwaukee
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2005, 23:09
thanks for such a quick response HongHu
_________________

Praveen

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

  [#permalink] 26 Mar 2005, 23:09
Display posts from previous: Sort by

To be accepted as a member at the Brown Country Club, one

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

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja



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®.