A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Compan

Question

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case, it is clearly not justified. It is true that  an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand , but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. Rather,  the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers .

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue.

(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.

(C) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

(D) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion.

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence against the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

(CR00777)

Similar Boldface from OG :    LINK

robinfish2310 · Accepted Answer

The answer is A, without any doubt. Pease give me a kudos

Im in dire need of just 1 to get a gmat test set. Thank you so much guys <3

GMATNinja · Answer

It’s important to remember that this question asks what role the two boldfaced portions play  in the argument given . We are not asked what the two boldfaced statements do or what they state. Rather, we’re specifically asked about their role  within the argument .

With that in mind, let’s take a look at (B):

The generalization that increased inventory “often indicates that production is outstripping demand” is used to support the investor’s position that the company is mismanaged. The argument is definitely opposes this position. It even goes on to further clarify its opposition to the generalization in this particular instance by stating that “in Burton’s case it (increased inventory) indicates no such thing.” So, the first part of (B) describes the role of the first boldfaced statement.

(B) goes on to suggest that the second boldfaced statement  clarifies the meaning  of a phrase used in the generalization found in the first boldfaced statement. It does seem to be the case that something about the increase in inventory is clarified. But is it true that the second boldfaced statement clarifies the MEANING of “increased inventory”? No, it does nothing to explain what increased inventory is. Rather, it explains WHY there is increased inventory (“because many products have already been assigned to orders received from customers”). In other words, it doesn’t explain WHAT “increased inventory” MEANS, but rather WHY the “increased inventory” is not attributable to production outstripping demand.

Again, it can also be helpful to remember that we’re looking for the role the boldface plays  in the argument . Has the author really included the second boldface just to explain what “increased inventory” means? No. Obviously, the author has a larger agenda in mind, and the  meaning  of “increased inventory” is not at issue. So, we can eliminate (B).

And here’s (A):

As we already established with (B), the first portion of (A) describes the role of the first boldfaced statement well. So, we must consider the role of the second boldfaced statement. In other words, why does the author explain that “the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers”?

The author has previously granted that,  generally , increased inventory means that production is outstripping demand. That would be problematic here, though, because it seems to support the investor’s argument that Burton is mismanaged, and we know that the author disagrees with this position. So, the author goes on to state that Burton is an exception to this generalization. And, in the second boldfaced statement, he/she explains how Burton’s increased inventory is due to products that have already been assigned to orders, and the generalization from the first boldfaced statement does not apply to Burton’s case. This is exactly what (A) describes, and it is correct.

I hope that helps!

mnav · Answer

Confused between A & B, but more inclined towards B
As second statement could not be a clear evidence but a possibility why the above generalisation (in first bold statement) not applicable in Burton's case

Sent from my Lenovo X3a40 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

nipun21 · Answer

Yes, i also believe the answer is A. As per the argument, the first bolded phrase is a general one however it is followed by 'but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing' which is again followed by the explanation of why it is not applicable in the given case.

Valhalla · Answer

Analysis:

P1: A prominent investor who holds a large stake in Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished product. (Claim made by the investors)
P2: It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case, it is clearly not justified. (Main conclusion author's point)
P3: It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. (Fact that author + investor agree ; fact that author explains in P4)
P4: Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received by customers. (Author's point : claims to support main conclusion)

NB.
P4 is an function as alternate explanation to P3 (fact)

Generalization can be fact
Position that the argument as a whole opposes (conclusion made by investors)

ANS: A

Please comment on explanations, as I still pretty weak in these type of questions. Thanks.

GyMrAT · Answer

Question Type: Bold face

Premise 1: An investor has claimed that Burton tool company is mismanaged. The evidence presented by him is failure to slow down production & increasing inventory of finished goods.

Premise 2: The author of the argument says in most cases the investors snipping has a positive effect on the strategy of a company, however in this case the investors claims are not justified. The author as a whole opposes the investors claim & provides a common view applicable for the situation and how it is not applicable in burton tool company's case

Conclusion: The argument as a whole thinks that the Burton tool company has valid reason for the inventory.

Analysis: The company strategy for holding inventory is justified with two supporting reasons by the author. The argument as a whole opposes the investors claims & justifies the case for burton tool company with supporting evidences.

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue. -  Correct. The first provides a common view in favor of the opposing argument & the second proves that the first is not applicable in this case. 
 
(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization. -  The second does not clarify meaning of first phrase. Incorrect 
 
(C) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes.  Incorrect. The first does not provide support for the conclusion 
 
(D) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion. -  The second is not the conclusion. Incorrect. 
 
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence against the position that the argument as a whole opposes. -  Evidence is not against the position that is opposed. Incorrect.

Answer A.

Thanks,
GyM

BrentGMATPrepNow · Answer

For boldfaced questions, students must be sure to  generically  summarize the roles that each part plays   BEFORE   examining the answer choices. Otherwise, it is much more difficult to determine the correct answer.

So here's my generic summary: 
The first boldfaced part describes the TYPICAL cause of a certain situation (i.e., the typical reason for increased inventory). 
The second boldfaced part explains that the ACTUAL cause of the current situation is different from the TYPICAL cause.

Once we have used generic language to describe the roles, we need only check the answer choices to locate the answer choice that matches our description of the rules.

When we do that, we see that the only match is answer choice A.

Answer: A

Cheers, 
Brent

unraveled · Answer

Statement 1 - A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. 
  This is just the base of the argument.   
Statement 2 - It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case, it is clearly not justified. 
  Author's general take/viewpoint. But this is in opposite direction to investor(opposite to first statement).   
Statement 3 - It is true that  an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand , but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. 
  This is similar to statement 2 just that it elaborates directly author's take on for(Burton's) side/viewpoint.  
Rather,  the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers .
  Here Author gives a reasoning that acts as a support to his/her claims(claims that are apposite to Burton's), may be fact.  
 
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue.
 
(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.
 
(C) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes.
 
(D) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion.
 
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence against the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

Since Boldface questions normally take on average take more time POE in vertical scanning manner helps a lot. 
Only A says that second boldface statement is against the first boldface statement.

Answer A.

AliciaSierra · Answer

Hello Experts, 
I chose option B for this question. My reasoning was "Increased in Inventory" doesn't only mean "production is outstripping demand", but it also mean that products have also been assigned to orders received.

I narrowed down options to A and B. I chose B over A.

Could you please help me.

CEdward · Answer

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case, it is clearly not justified. It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue.

Correct. Words like generalization are sneakily deceptive. I digress. This is the correct choice. The position that the passage opposes is this claim by the investor who thinks Burton is mismanaged. BF1 is the basis of that investor's argument. BF2 tells us that the rise in inventory should not be perceived as the management's inability to recognize the balance in supply and demand, but that it can be attributed to the fact that these are orders which customers have already placed.

(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second  clarifies the meaning  of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.

(C) The first provides evidence to  support the conclusion  of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

BF1 is not supporting the conclusion of the argument...it's the basis of the position being opposed by the argument.

(D) The first provides evidence to  support the conclusion  of the argument as a whole; the  second states that conclusion .

(E) The  first  and the second each provide evidence against the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

PyjamaScientist · Answer

Clear split between (A) and (B).

The first boldface, describes the "General" cause of a certain situation (i.e., rise in inventory with respect to demand).
The second boldface, explains that the "situation at hand" is different from the "General" case. And refutes the investor's claim.

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue. 
First BF indeed is a generalisation as explained above. Second BF too is providing evidence to prove that the generalisation doesn't apply on case at hand. Correct choice.

(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.
 
First BF is correct; but the second BF is not clarifying any phrase in the "generalisation" stated in 1st BF. Incorrect.

Option  (A)  wins . And is thus correct.

Gemmie · Answer

The two boldfaced portions play the following roles:
 
 The first boldfaced portion states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes. This generalization is that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand. 
 The second boldfaced portion provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case of Burton Tool Company. The argument is that the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.  
In other words, the argument is saying that the investor's criticism of Burton Tool Company is wrong. The investor is assuming that the increased inventory means that production is out of control, but the argument shows that this is not the case.

Therefore, the answer is (A).

KarishmaB · Answer

Context: A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products.

The author concedes this point in favour of the position he opposes: It is true that  an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand  (a generalization)

Premise supporting the author's argument:  the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers  (author tells us why the generalization doesn't apply for Burton)

Conclusion (author's position): The company is not mismanaged.

(A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue.

Correct. The first BF does state a generalization (this is what generally happens). This generalization supports the investor's claim - a claim that the author opposes. 
The second BF tells us why the generalization does not apply in the case at hand.

(B) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.

The second does not clarify the meaning of a specific phrase. It tells us why the generalisation does not apply in this particular case.

(C) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

The first opposes the conclusion of the argument as a whole. Incorrect

(D) The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion.

The first opposes the conclusion of the argument as a whole. Incorrect

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence against the position that the argument as a whole opposes.

The first and second provide evidence for different positions. Hence this cannot be true.

Answer (A)

ROMLIN · Answer

The correct answer is:
 (A) The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue. 
Explanation:
 
  Understanding the Argument :
 
 The argument opposes the investor's claim that Burton Tool Company is mismanaged due to an increase in inventory, which traditionally suggests overproduction relative to demand. 
 The argument asserts that in this specific case, the inventory increase is due to customer orders already received, implying the rise in inventory does not reflect mismanagement or an imbalance between supply and demand.  
 
  Analyzing the Boldfaced Portions :
 
  First Boldfaced Portion : "An increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand."
 
 This is a generalization and forms the basis of the investor's position.  
 
  Second Boldfaced Portion : "The increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers."
 
 This provides evidence that the generalization does not apply here because the inventory increase is not due to overproduction but to pending orders.

Matching to Answer Choice :
 
 (A) correctly identifies the roles of the two boldfaced statements:
 
 The first is a generalization that supports the investor’s critique (which the argument opposes). 
 The second is specific evidence to show that the generalization does not apply to Burton’s situation.

Thus,  (A)  is the best answer.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Compan

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

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Compan

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