Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased

Question

Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased 25 percent. This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping, rather than just free shipping on orders over $50. Thus, our change in policy probably caused the increase.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

(A) Mail-order sales have been decreasing for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping.
(B) The company did not widely advertise its change in policy.
(C) The company's profits from mail-order sales have increased since the change in policy.
(D) The company's change in policy occurred well after its competitors started offering unlimited free shipping.
(E) Most companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50.

LSAT

VeritasPrepBrian · Accepted Answer

Good question, with a couple really important takeaways if you don't mind me breaking down your post.

1) "how can I say that the reason for decrease in mail order of other companies..."

Note that his isn't your job at all! Your job in Strengthen questions is to strengthen the exact conclusion being given, which here is "our change in policy probably caused the increase" - the problem is about this one company, not all the others.

2) "...is definitely because"

Also important - in Strengthen questions your job isn't to prove something ("definitely") but instead to find a reason that makes it more likely.

What (A) does here is take away the possibility that this particular company's online sales are up primarily because everyone's sales are up - that it isn't a consequence of anything the company itself did, just a consequence of the industry overall doing really well. But if (A) is true, then there's something that this particular company is doing that the others aren't, and one thing we do know that's a difference is that this company has free shipping and the others don't. This doesn't prove at all that the policy is the reason for the increase, but by taking away the "no, everyone's doing well" possibility it does make the conclusion more likely to be true.

broall · Answer

Two things could be compared if those two thing are in common. The company's claim could be true if there is any evidence shows that the new policy has a good effect on company's mail-order sales, or shows that other companies that implement this new policy also enjoy increase in mail-order sales.

Only A conveys this comparision so A is the correct answer. Other choices are irrelevant to the argument.

nkin · Answer

Argument says: Policy changes caused increase in sales (X caused Y).

Any answer saying Z caused Y or Y did not happen implies X did not happen can be correct.

Option A talks in similar lines to the latter logic above.

elifceylan · Answer

I also picked A but I must admit that C was pretty tempting. Can you please explain why the option cant be C?

Abhishek009 · Answer

For Strengthener type questions there must be addition of new information to the existing stimulus, check carefully , option (C) is a mere restatement of the following from the passage " This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping "

Hence, (C) may be discarded.

ntoma2 · Answer

In option A how can I say that the reason for decrease in mail order of other companies is definitely because they did not offer unlimited free shipping. It can also be because of other factors. Bad quality of products, damage during shipping etc.

Please help me understand this.

Please help me understand this.

Yogesh_24 · Answer

Option E also correctly takes into consideration that since other companes are not offering free shipping on below $50, then this company is at the advantage.?

NoMatterWhat · Answer

IMO: E is out of scope

there is no relation b/w sales and shipping.
Sales may have increased or decreased after charging $50 for Many Companies..we are not sure about it.

A shows the co-relation b/w sales and shipping ...much clear; Hence Correct

Thanks = KUDOS

nedunurianurag · Answer

According to me C is not the right option because it talks about increase in profits while I argument talks about increase in sales. We cannot correlate the increase in profits with increase in sales nor can we say that increase in sales and profits are the same. Hence, the option itself is out of context or irrelevant to strengthen the argument

akshay0542 · Answer

Hi Expert 
If i am not wrong this is cause and effect type question
Option B is providing alternate solution of incresing sales. So why optoion B is not correct. 
Or is it that option B is assumption we are making here

auradediligodo · Answer

Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased 25 percent. This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping, rather than just free shipping on orders over $50. Thus, our change in policy probably caused the increase.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

Strengthen question

Pre-thinking

The argument says that after a change in policy there was an increase in sales and hence such increase has to be related to the change in policy.

Falsification scenario:   What if the increase is related to some other X factor

Assumption  : the increase is not related to any other factor than the change in policy

POE

(A)   Mail-order sales have been decreasing for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping.
 Normally I would eliminate this one since it is always a stretch to compare two entities in this way (the decrease in sales might be related to other factors as well). However after eliminating all the other options this one is the best one since it allows a scenario in which the decrease in sales is related to the lack of implementation of the free delivery shipping

(B) The company did not widely advertise its change in policy.
 Irrelevant

(C) The company's profits from mail-order sales have increased since the change in policy.
 Profits do not remotely suggest that the change in policy is related to the increase in sales. OUT

(D) The company's change in policy occurred well after its competitors started offering unlimited free shipping.
 Irrelevant

(E) Most companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50.
 Irrelevant

VVV94 · Answer

GMATNinja   GMATNinja Two  nightblade354   carouselambra   mira93

Hey Experts!

Hope you are doing well! Can you please explain why E) is incorrect? Also, in A) isn't it possible to say that there might be other factors as well resulting into decrease in sales?

carouselambra · Answer

VikasVala

Let's break down the argument.

1)Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased 25 percent.
Initial mail-order sales : 100
After increase: 125

2)This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping, rather than just free shipping on orders over $50. 
Cause : unlimited free shipping, not just orders over $50
Effect : Increase in sales

So, the company essentially rules out all the other reasons. For example, increase in customer base, effective ads/marketing, improvement in work etc.

3)Thus, our change in policy probably caused the increase.
This is the conclusion

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?
Most strengthens = We have to play by the Cause -> Effect equation where in we rule out even the remotest involvement of any other factor.

(A) Mail-order sales have been decreasing for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping.
If this were true, then company's argument stands 100% true. The adoption of unlimited free shipping policy would have single handedly contributed to the increase in sales.
This means that despite the other companies trying various other strategies, they might have not been successful.

(E) Most companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50.
Now, MOST means any number from >50% to ALL
Consider both the scenarios now.

50% companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50 - how does this argument tell us about any information about their sales? For all we know, the policy stated in the argument might be costing them dearly. (E) does not share any information about the conclusion as well.

100% companies offer free shipping on mail-order purchases over $50 - same logic applicable as above.

Hope this helps!

unraveled · Answer

Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased 25 percent. This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping, rather than just free shipping on orders over $50. Thus, our change in policy probably caused the increase.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the manager's argument?

(A) Mail-order sales have been decreasing for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping. - CORRECT. Other companies' revenue loss manager's company's revenue gain.
(B) The company did not widely advertise its change in policy. - WRONG. Okay, this looks promising. However, it needs certain assumptions to be made if it's to strengthen and equally certain assumption may lead for it to weaken as well. 
(C) The company's profits from mail-order sales have increased since the change in policy. - WRONG. Profit is not directly proportional to revenue.
(D) The company's change in policy occurred well after its competitors started offering unlimited free shipping. - WRONG. May be so what..!! Did it increase revenue but how. So many assumption and P&Cs possible.
(E) Most companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50. - WRONG. Not our concern whether what most companies offer.

Answer A.

Rickooreo · Answer

unraveled   nightblade354   egmat   ExpertsGlobal5   MartyTargetTestPrep

Conclusion - Thus, our change in policy probably caused the increase.

Option A - Mail-order sales have been decreasing for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping.
It is not necessary for mail-order sales to decrease for companies, it can very well remain constant and the sales of this company can increase.
This gives a Yes and a No situation for the reason given and hence I eliminated this.

vs this option E - Most companies offer free shipping only on mail-order purchases over $50.
If other company policies then it so it means other companies are not offering it but this company is offering it, hence the cause of increase and thus strengthens.

Can you please help me understand what mistake I am making

GMATCoachBen · Answer

Rickooreo Tough question, but the solution is clearer as we become more comfortable with causation arguments. We run into problems when we make too many assumptions with our reasoning. Choice E could be tempting, because it does point to a possible competitive advantage, but we still don't know whether the unlimited free shipping was actually the CAUSE of the increased sales. Maybe most companies know better and don't offer unlimited free shipping because it doesn't actually increase their sales significantly. A correct answer to a Strengthen question very often serves to remove a weakness. By far, the most common weakness to a causation argument is an ALTERNATE CAUSE. Just because 2 things happen at the same time, doesn't mean that one caused the other. For example, in this situation, alternate causes of increased sales could be an improved economy, better marketing, etc. Does Choice A reduce the likelihood of an alternate cause? Yes, if sales have been decreasing for companies who don't offer unlimited free shipping, this suggests that the cause for increased sales is not just other positive market conditions, such as an improved economy. Alternatively, if all companies' sales were increasing at the same time, despite different shipping policies, then the cause is likely some broader economic factor other than their shipping policies. Furthermore, it is also logical that if sales decrease for companies not offering unlimited free shipping, some of these sales are likely instead going to companies who do offer unlimited free shipping. I also recommend this great explanation by VeritasPrepBrian : https://gmatclub.com/forum/manager-our- ... l#p2286188 Please let me know if that helps or if you have any further questions.

rvgmat12 · Answer

OA from PS Forum:

Strengthen—CE. The correct answer choice is (A)

The conclusion of the argument suggests that the policy of free shipping increased mail-order sales:
Premise: ..... Our company’s mail-order sales have increased 25 percent.

Premise: ..... This increase started around the time we started offering unlimited free shipping.

Conclusion: ..... Our change in policy probably caused the increase.

Cause ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... Effect

Unlimited Free Shipping ..... :arrow: ..... Sale Increase
As with all causal arguments, you must critically evaluate the causality described in them. The conclusion, which is easy to spot due to the conclusion indicator “thus,” is based on a mere coincidence. Just because the introduction of free shipping coincided with a sales increase does not automatically prove that the former caused the latter. There may be an alternate cause for the stated effect, or both might be coincidental effects of another cause. To strengthen the cause and effect relationship, look for answers that either eliminate the possibility of alternate causes, or provide examples that strengthen the conclusion. Any scenario where the cause occurs and the effect follows, or—alternatively—where the cause does not occur and the effect does not occur, would lend credibility to the conclusion.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, as it strengthens the argument by showing a scenario where the cause does not occur and the effect does not occur. Indeed, if companies that do not offer free shipping happen to suffer from a decrease in their mail-order sales, that provides further evidence of a causal relationship between the two.
Note that this answer choice describes a coincidence that does not prove the cause and effect relationship—it is still possible that other causes could account for the stated effect. In Strengthen questions, your choice should be based upon a comparative analysis between the five answer choices, and the correct answer choice does not have to prove the conclusion 100% to be correct.

Answer choice (B): This Opposite answer hurts the argument by suggesting that the change in policy was not widely advertised. If few people knew about the free shipping, it is unlikely that the sales increase resulted from it.

Answer choice (C): Whether the company’s profits have increased following the policy change is irrelevant. We know that their sales are up, and it is reasonable to assume that—all other things being equal—their profits would also increase. This does not mean that the change in policy increased the company’s sales, or their profits.

Answer choice (D): If the company started offering free shipping after its competitors did, this suggests that the company was under pressure to compete. However, what caused the change in policy is an irrelevant consideration; the question is whether the sales increase resulted from it.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice implies that unlimited free shipping is offered by few other companies, and that the manager’s company is relatively unique in this respect. For this to be a relevant consideration, however, we need to know what the sales volume is for those competitors who offer limited free shipping. Without this information, answer choice (E) cannot strengthen the conclusion.

ameyabarve · Answer

I understand that Option A strengthens by suggesting that sales for other companies have been decreasing as they dont provide free unlimited shipping. So this policy change mustve increased our sales.

But
Option E - Because most companies offer free shipping only over 50, this change in policy increased the mail-order sales and this strengthens the conclusion.

What am I missing here can somebody please help?

GMATNinja · Answer

The problem with (E) is that we have no idea whether sales made by the manager's company are impacted by the sales made by most other companies.

If we were told that the manager's company was in direct competition with those other companies, then sure, (E) would be tempting. Maybe the other companies are losing customers to the manager's company because of the favorable shipping policy. But for all we know, those companies that offer free shipping only for orders over $50 are actually doing just fine and have not suffered any adverse effects because of their shipping policies.

With (A), we don't need to make any other assumptions: there's a GENERAL downward trend in mail-order sales for companies that do not offer unlimited free shipping, and that's evidence (not proof, just evidence) that NOT offering unlimited free shipping is bad for mail-order sales. (It would also suggest that offering unlimited free shipping is good for mail-order sales). This supports the theory the policy changed caused the increase.

A friendly reminder: we don't need to PROVE that the policy change caused the increase. We just need to STRENGTHEN this theory.

I hope that helps!

Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased

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

Manager: Our company's mail-order sales have recently increased

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