Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 01 Dec 2012
Posts: 35
Concentration: Finance, Operations
GPA: 2.9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 48 [1] , given: 8

Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in [#permalink] ### Show Tags 16 Jan 2013, 14:21 1 This post received KUDOS 2 This post was BOOKMARKED 00:00 Difficulty: 45% (medium) Question Stats: 64% (02:38) correct 36% (01:24) wrong based on 367 sessions ### HideShow timer Statistics Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year.

Each of the following, if true, could explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT:
a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys.
b)Toys4Them sold a higher proportion of more expensive toys last year than the previous year.
c)Last year, the number of consumers shopping for toys increased over the previous year.
d)Last year, Toys4Them experienced an unprecedented boom in its divisions that do not sell toys.
e)Because of an economic downturn, Toys4Them heavily discounted its toys during the holiday season two years ago.

IMO , except C & E , all other options clearly resolve the discrepancy.
OA is C not E. However I could nt be able to figure out , how does option E resolve the discrepancy .
So help me to figure out the same ...

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3138
Followers: 808

Kudos [?]: 6786 [2] , given: 1050

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2013, 16:40
@carcass :Thanks for ur reply ,
I had no doubt abt option "C" , but I was more confused with option "E".
After reading ur reply , One more things , I figured out i.e. Discounted offer on toys may not be present => so it may be that toys are currently sold on its selling price => it may result in higher revenue , even though the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year=> hence it resolves the paradox .

thanks
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3138
Followers: 808

Kudos [?]: 6786 [0], given: 1050

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2013, 13:20
MOKSH wrote:
Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year. Each of the following, if true, could explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT: a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys. b)Toys4Them sold a higher proportion of more expensive toys last year than the previous year. c)Last year, the number of consumers shopping for toys increased over the previous year. d)Last year, Toys4Them experienced an unprecedented boom in its divisions that do not sell toys. e)Because of an economic downturn, Toys4Them heavily discounted its toys during the holiday season two years ago. IMO , except C & E , all other options clearly resolve the discrepancy. OA is C not E. However I could nt be able to figure out , how does option E resolve the discrepancy . So help me to figure out the same ... Thanks in advance . oh well,i think the best thing is to understand the question stem,the stimulus,and the answer choices themselves..check this one out.the arguement presented to answer makes a comparison of sales made last with a previous year under certain conditions(unstated assumptions)which brought in a difference in revenue collected..now the question stem asks to provide an option that does not explain the discrepancy in the arguement..the discrepancy they are talking about it the more revenue thing when less toys are sold out..all options except C explain that descrepancy..C is contradictory to the statement(the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year.)in a way that it says that consumers increased in number inferring that they bought more of the toys from that shop..hence C is the answer to the question. Posted from my mobile device Intern Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Posts: 7 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: -25 [3] , given: 1 Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2013, 13:55
3
KUDOS
For Paradox questions the correct answer will actively resolve the paradox, that is, it will allow both sides to be factually correct and it will either explain how the situation came into being or add a piece of information that shows how the two ideas or occurrences can coexist.

Because you are not seeking to disprove one side of the situation, you must select the answer choice that contains a possible cause of the situation. So, when examining answers, ask yourself if the answer choice could lead to the situation in the stimulus. If so, the answer is correct.

If an answer supports or proves only one side of the paradox, that answer will be incorrect. The correct answer must show how both sides
coexist.

The following types of answers are incorrect:
1. Explains only one side of the paradox If an answer supports or proves only one side of the paradox, that answer will be incorrect. The correct answer must show how both sides coexist.
2. Similarities and differences If the stimulus contains a paradox where two items are similar, then an answer choice that explains a difference between the two cannot be correct.
Conversely, if the stimulus contains a paradox where two items are different, then an answer choice that explains why the two are similar
cannot be correct. In short, a similarity cannot explain a difference, and a difference cannot explain a similarity.

Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year. Each of the following, if true, could explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT: There are no conclusion in paradox questions, so all we got are facts. Examine the facts very closely. toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year

It tells about the revenue last year $220 million, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. Does not tell anything about operating cost or profit. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year. a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys.-- Fair enough, if previously they were counting charity toys as sold and accounting for its sale, then changing that policy will increase there revenues and will actively resolve the paradox. b)Toys4Them sold a higher proportion of more expensive toys last year than the previous year. --- This resolves the paradox if last year they hold more expensive toys than previous year, the increase revenue could be explained given the fact the total number of toys sold did not increased. c)Last year, the number of consumers shopping for toys increased over the previous year. --- hmnnn. Classic example of what i mentioned above.If an answer supports or proves only one side of the paradox, that answer will be incorrect. The correct answer must show how both sides coexist. This only explains what may have caused the increase in revenue but does not address the fact that number of toys sold did not increased significantly. Correct Answer d)Last year, Toys4Them experienced an unprecedented boom in its divisions that do not sell toys. --- This again holds both side of the conversation. If this is true then the increased revenue could be from this division and not from the sale of the toys. e)Because of an economic downturn, Toys4Them heavily discounted its toys during the holiday season two years ago--- This hold both side of the conversation. More revenue generated but not significant increase in the number of toys sold. So this indeed resolve the paradox. Take Away: Resolve the paradox only gives you facts and facts are indisputable. So any answer choice that validate one of the facts but invalidate another one is always going to be wrong. Right answer should explain you how this situation came into existence. Intern Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Posts: 1 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0 Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2013, 14:28
Great explanation Kingston. This surely helps.
Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2013
Posts: 80
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2013, 19:29
5
KUDOS
@chiccufrazer1: Firstly, assumptions are always unstated. If they state the assumption, then i guess it would no longer be an assumption. Secondly. in paradox question you dont want to qualify one or the other statement. They are facts and they are indisputable.
When first presented with a Resolve question, most student seek an answer choice that destroys or disproves one side of the situation. They follow the reasoning that if one side can be proven false, then the paradox will be eliminated. While this is true, the test makers know that such an answer would be obvious (it would simply contradict part of the facts given in the stimulus) and thus this type of answer does not appear in these questions. Instead, the correct answer will actively resolve the paradox, that is, it will allow both sides
to be factually correct and it will either explain how the situation came into being or add a piece of information that shows how the two ideas or occurrences can coexist. Because you are not seeking to disprove one side of the situation, you must
select the answer choice that contains a possible cause of the situation. So, when examining answers, ask yourself if the answer choice could lead to the situation in the stimulus. If so, the answer is correct.
Manager
Joined: 07 Apr 2012
Posts: 126
Location: United States
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
Schools: ISB '15
GMAT 1: 590 Q48 V23
GPA: 3.9
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 45

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2013, 00:14
ygdrasil24 wrote:
Looks pretty straightforward to me.

Sales has gone down, and revenue gone up.
Possibilties ?

A. Direct increase in price (option B)
B. Previously selling at lower price( option E)
C. Any other factor that had increased revenue, not related to sales(option D)
D. Not counting few non billed items - no effect ( A)

Left is C, # of consumers has no bearing on # of toys they are buying.

Sales have not gone down, they have remained same or slightly increased. But you are correct in saying that the increase in the number of consumers buying the toys does not impact the actual sales of those toys. For example a consumer earlier could be buying 2 toys on an average, whereas the new average maybe lower let' say 1.5. So even though the consumers might have increased, they might not impact the overall sales.
_________________

--It's one thing to get defeated, but another to accept it.

Current Student
Joined: 02 Apr 2013
Posts: 66
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: Q V
GPA: 3
WE: Science (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 26

Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in [#permalink] ### Show Tags 03 Sep 2013, 23:33 MOKSH wrote: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year.

Each of the following, if true, could explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT:
a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys.
b)Toys4Them sold a higher proportion of more expensive toys last year than the previous year.
c)Last year, the number of consumers shopping for toys increased over the previous year.
d)Last year, Toys4Them experienced an unprecedented boom in its divisions that do not sell toys.
e)Because of an economic downturn, Toys4Them heavily discounted its toys during the holiday season two years ago.

Question: which answer does not explain why revenue increased while toys sold stayed roughly the same?

(A) changed accounting methods --> artificially increased revenue
(b) more expensive toys were sold than cheap toys, total is still same --> increased revenue
(c) more consumers bought toys --> increased toys sold --> conflicts with what paragraph explicitly says --> this is unhelpful and thus the answer
(d) another department did well --> increased revenue
(e) economic downturn two years ago --> sold their toys less two years ago --> this year, prices were back to normal --> increased revenue
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10637
Followers: 940

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2016, 06:45
MOKSH wrote:
Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in revenue last year, an 8.6 percent increase over the previous year. However, the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year. Each of the following, if true, could explain the apparent discrepancy EXCEPT: a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys. b)Toys4Them sold a higher proportion of more expensive toys last year than the previous year. c)Last year, the number of consumers shopping for toys increased over the previous year. d)Last year, Toys4Them experienced an unprecedented boom in its divisions that do not sell toys. e)Because of an economic downturn, Toys4Them heavily discounted its toys during the holiday season two years ago. C for me. any other answer helps to explain the discrepancy. Intern Joined: 27 Jun 2015 Posts: 28 Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 24 Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2016, 22:47
I agree with C). Nevertheless I have a question how to eliminate A)
"a)Last year, Toys4Them changed its accounting policy to no longer count toys given away to charities as sold toys."

If the company does not account the toys given away to charities as sold toys then the revenue should be lower and not greater or?
Example:
Year 2000: Revenue = 220 Mio (including 10 Mio for toys given away to charities)
Year 2001: Revenue = 210 (new accounting approach without the 10 Mio )

Can me someone explain how this argument helps to clarify that the revenue increased?

Thank you!
Kind regards.
Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2760
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
Followers: 394

Kudos [?]: 1774 [1] , given: 22

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2016, 09:23
Got it, thank you sayantanc2k.

I only thought about the decrease in revenue because of the changed approach (not counting donated toys) and did not consider anymore that the question states that the revenue increased.

Thank you
Intern
Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 48
GPA: 3.8
WE: Supply Chain Management (Manufacturing)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 104

Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated $220 million in [#permalink] ### Show Tags 01 Oct 2016, 10:44 MOKSH wrote: carcass :Thanks for ur reply , I had no doubt abt option "C" , but I was more confused with option "E". After reading ur reply , One more things , I figured out i.e. Discounted offer on toys may not be present => so it may be that toys are currently sold on its selling price => it may result in higher revenue , even though the number of toys sold did not increase significantly last year over the previous year=> hence it resolves the paradox . thanks that was my reasoning as well, hence I eliminated e and chose c. And everyone else makes valid points as well but I definitely thought like you for option "e." Re: Toys4Them, an online toy merchant, generated$220 million in   [#permalink] 01 Oct 2016, 10:44
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Internal Memorandum from Toy Supply Company 11 03 Jan 2016, 09:01
2 A toy company's engineering department developed a new model 4 09 Dec 2013, 10:44
1 Child s World, a chain of toy stores, has relied on a 12 30 Dec 2009, 14:21
Consumer advocate: The toy-labeling law should require 14 09 Oct 2007, 06:31
Archaeologists have found wheeled ceramic toys made by the 4 07 May 2007, 20:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by