Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for

Question

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from home, so the perception that it is bad for the environment is misguided. Because of direct-mail advertising, millions of people buy products by phone or online - products whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car, thus adding pollutants to the air.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(A) Although the primary intent of most direct-mail advertisers is to convince people to buy products from their homes, direct mail can also lead to increased sales in stores by customers who prefer to see a product prior to purchasing it.
(B) Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail advertisements.
(C) A person who receives and reads a direct-mail advertisement is more likely to purchase the product advertised than is a person who reads an advertisement for a product in a magazine that they subscribe to.
(D) Usually, a company that sends out direct-mail advertisements has good reason to think that the person to whom the advertisement is sent would be more interested in the product than would the average person.
(E) Products purchased as the result of direct-mail advertising comprise an increasingly large portion of the consumer products purchased each year.

progressgmat · Accepted Answer

Summary: direct-mail advertising leads to phone/online purchases (rather than in store purchases), and thus it is not bad for the environment.

A) If direct mail CAN lead to in-store purchases, this means that direct-mail advertising MAY indeed be bad for the environment. A slight weakener. Incorrect
 B) This choice implies that it CANNOT be claimed that direct-mail advertisements are bad for the environment. Person X (whether he/she purchases the product online/over the phone or in person) will still purchase the product in the absence of the direct-mail advertisement. IMO, Correct. 
C) This implies that direct-mail advertisements lead to purchases (more so than magazine advertisements). Does this guarantee mostly online/phone purchases? No. Incorrect
D) This implies that the advertising is targeted, but it does not imply that purchases would necessarily be made online/over the phone. Incorrect
E) This implies direct-mail advertising leads to increased sales, but it does not mention whether these were from in person sales. Incorrect.

surendrasaini1 · Answer

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from home, so the perception that it is bad for the environment is misguided. Because of direct-mail advertising, millions of people buy products by phone or online - products whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car, thus adding pollutants to the air.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(A) Although the primary intent of most direct-mail advertisers is to convince people to buy products from their homes, direct mail can also lead to increased sales in stores by customers who prefer to see a product prior to purchasing it.( doesn't support)
(B) Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail advertisements.( Keep)
(C) A person who receives and reads a direct-mail advertisement is more likely to purchase the product advertised than is a person who reads an advertisement for a product in a magazine that they subscribe to.( Doesn't support)
(D) Usually, a company that sends out direct-mail advertisements has good reason to think that the person to whom the advertisement is sent would be more interested in the product than would the average person.(doesn't support)
(E) Products purchased as the result of direct-mail advertising comprise an increasingly large portion of the consumer products purchased each year.( Doesn't support)

Will go with option B.

sups3906 · Answer

I think B points out that customers purchase only those products that are necessary, something they would have bought from store had there been no direct-mail advertising. This affirms that direct-mail does not provoke customers to purchase extra products, which could lead to increased pollution due to transport.

Hea234ven · Answer

I am trying to resolve the conflict between B and E. Look carefully at the last sentence of the argument. There is a link--we can only strengthen the argument if we can prove that the products that were bought using car before will be bought in the new method by ordering from home, and in this way we can tell that there will be less pollution because these products are not being bought using cars which cause smoke and thus pollution. Now think in this way----if we can only order particular types of goods in the new method, and these types of goods have no relation with pollution (for example, they can be ordered by using credit card), then how could we prove that we will be able to remove pollution in the new method of ordering??
In. E, it is said that large proportion of the goods is consumer products. This option doesn't directly resolve the issue---can we reduce pollution?

KaranB1 · Answer

Akshay2402

TheNightKing

Let me explain as to why B is a correct choice.

Conclusion says - Since people would buy product by the means of phone or online there will be less pollution as less transportation will be used.

Lets take some numbers to understand - for 1000 unit product purchased by the means of transport(With the use of car) on an average 20 cubic gram pollution is produced. And for 1000 units product purchased without transportation i.e. through phone or online 10 cubic gram pollution is produced.

Now, the  flaw in the argument  is that author assumes people will not buy products because of the direct advertising on top of what they usually buy. If that is the case then more pollution will be produced.

Answer choice B bridges the gap in the argument and hence is correct answer choice.

CEdward · Answer

It seems like you've built in a contradiction. Direct-mail advertisements in the context of this passage leads to phone or online purchases (i.e. they are intertwined).

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from home, so the perception that it is bad for the environment is misguided. Because of direct-mail advertising, millions of people buy products by phone or online - products whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car, thus adding pollutants to the air.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

(A) Although the primary intent of most direct-mail advertisers is to convince people to buy products from their homes, direct mail can also lead to increased sales in stores by customers who prefer to see a product prior to purchasing it.
-wrong direction, this potentially weakens

(B) Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail advertisements. CORRECT
-this choice indicates that the direct mail advertising caused a reduction in in-store purchases (that would require a car/other means of transportation)

(C) A person who receives and reads a direct-mail advertisement is more likely to purchase the product advertised than is a person who reads an advertisement for a product in a magazine that they subscribe to.
-irrelevant comparison

(D) Usually, a company that sends out direct-mail advertisements  has good reason  to think that the person to whom the advertisement is sent would be more interested in the product than would the average person.
-we don't need this kind of descriptive, tangential explanation

(E) Products purchased as the result of direct-mail advertising comprise an increasingly  large portion  of the consumer products purchased each year.
-trap choice, this could simply be because the NUMBER of other products that are not purchased as a result of the direct-mail advertising decreased

YashYashkratos · Answer

Pre-thinking - people will purchase the products through phone and get it delivered with other packages instead of using their cars and go shopping - but wait what if these products are just additional useless products these people never buy that would mean there will be extra pollutants for no reason.

B) says that these products will be purchased anyway so a better more environment friendly solution in direct mail marketing.
GMAT has tested this logic quite often - a simple statement that adds to the pre-thinking but seems irrelevant or at least less strong at first read.

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hey, I faced the same issue, but my reasoning with B is that conclusion talks about only the "misguided" belief. Now if B is true, meaning consumers were bound to purchase those, no matter what, then Direct-mail is doing nothing.

guddo · Answer

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from home, so the perception that it is bad for the environment is misguided. Because of direct-mail advertising, millions of people buy products by phone or online - products whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car, thus adding pollutants to the air.
 
 Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument?

The argument says direct-mail advertising may help the environment because it leads people to buy from home instead of driving to stores.  The key assumption  is that many purchases caused by direct mail really replace purchases that would otherwise have required car trips.

(A) Although the primary intent of most direct-mail advertisers is to convince people to buy products from their homes, direct mail can also lead to increased sales in stores by customers who prefer to see a product prior to purchasing it.

Wrong. This weakens the argument because direct mail may actually encourage some store trips.

(B) Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail advertisements.

Correct. If people would have bought those products anyway, then direct mail changes the method of purchase from driving to a store to buying from home. That directly supports the claim that direct mail can reduce car use and related pollution.

(C) A person who receives and reads a direct-mail advertisement is more likely to purchase the product advertised than is a person who reads an advertisement for a product in a magazine that they subscribe to.

Wrong. This compares direct mail with magazine advertising, but it does not show that direct mail reduces car trips.

(D) Usually, a company that sends out direct-mail advertisements has good reason to think that the person to whom the advertisement is sent would be more interested in the product than would the average person.

Wrong. This explains targeting, but not whether purchases from home replace purchases by car.

(E) Products purchased as the result of direct-mail advertising comprise an increasingly large portion of the consumer products purchased each year.

Wrong. This shows direct-mail purchases are increasing, but not that they replace car-based purchases.

Answer: (B)

TheYagami · Answer

Even without direct mail, people could STILL buy online/phone delivery.
Then:
no car trip happens anyway
direct mail doesn’t reduce pollution
So is B flawed?

guddo · Answer

B is not flawed because the argument already says those products, without direct-mail purchasing, would  otherwise require the use of a car .

So your scenario:

without direct mail, people still buy online or by phone

is ruled out by the argument’s own setup.

B strengthens by saying the products were not extra purchases created by direct mail. They were purchases people would have made anyway, but direct mail lets them make those purchases  from home instead of by car .

VibhuAnurag · Answer

The argument claims that direct-mail advertising is not environmentally harmful because it encourages people to buy products from home rather than driving to stores, thereby reducing automobile pollution. So the key assumption is that without direct-mail advertising, many of these purchases would still occur, but they would require car trips. 
 A strong strengthening answer should therefore support the idea that direct-mail advertising changes  how  people buy products, not whether they buy them.

Option A:  
 This option says that direct mail can also increase in-store sales by customers who want to see products before purchasing them.   This actually weakens the argument slightly b  ecause if direct-mail advertising causes more people to go to stores, then it may increase driving rather than reduce it.

Option B:  
 This says that most products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the advertisements. This strongly strengthens the argument. The argument’s logic is that people would have bought these products anyway, but without direct-mail advertising they might have driven to stores to purchase them, whereas direct-mail advertising allows them to buy from home instead. So, this supports the idea that direct-mail advertising reduces car usage rather than merely increasing consumption. This directly strengthens the environmental claim.

Option C:  
 This says people are more likely to buy a product after reading a direct-mail advertisement than after seeing a magazine advertisement.   This compares two forms of advertising, but the argument is about environmental impact, not advertising effectiveness.   So, this is largely irrelevant.

Option D:  
 This says companies target people likely to be interested in the product.   This may explain why direct-mail advertising is effective, but it does not show that it reduces pollution or car usage.   So, it does not strengthen the conclusion.

Option E:  
 This says products purchased through direct-mail advertising make up an increasingly large portion of consumer purchases.   This tells us direct-mail advertising is becoming more common, but it does not show whether it reduces pollution.   In fact, if these purchases are additional purchases rather than replacements for store visits, the environmental benefit becomes less clear.

The answer is B.

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for

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

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for

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