It is currently 21 Nov 2017, 21:21

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

TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 167

Kudos [?]: 10 [1], given: 0

Location: Vienna, Austria
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 06:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

79% (00:51) correct 21% (01:04) wrong based on 456 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

(A) Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring damage during shipping than are typical electronic products

(B) Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most other products shipped by mail-order companies

(C) Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping

(D) Whether there are cases in which customers blame themselves for product damage that, though present on arrival of the product, is not discovered until later

(E) Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping companies it uses to ship products to its customer
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by hazelnut on 03 Jun 2017, 22:02, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 10 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Posts: 486

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 13

Schools: Kellogg, MIT, Michigan, Berkeley, Marshall, Mellon
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 09:59
Hi guys,

I'd say C

OA?

Cheers
_________________

mates, please visit my profile and leave comments
http://gmatclub.com/forum/johnlewis1980-s-profile-feedback-is-more-than-welcome-80538.html

I'm not linked to GMAT questions anymore, so, if you need something, please PM me

I'm already focused on my application package :)

My experience in my second attempt
http://gmatclub.com/forum/p544312#p544312
My experience in my third attempt
http://gmatclub.com/forum/630-q-47-v-28-engineer-non-native-speaker-my-experience-78215.html#p588275

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 13

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1534

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 11:10
D.

If customers do not return damaged goods, manager's proposal fails.

Kudos [?]: 280 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1402

Kudos [?]: 443 [0], given: 1

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 11:39
C for me as well.

If a lot of products have damage before shipping, manager's proposal will cost more.

Kudos [?]: 443 [0], given: 1

4 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Posts: 49

Kudos [?]: 11 [4], given: 0

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 12:43
4
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to
customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer
orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate
damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain
unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current
cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged
condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether
implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

The shipping manager's assumption is that the cause of electronic damage comes only from shipping. As a result, he proposes to use more expensive material. Had the damage come from a worker mishandling the electronics, the more expensive packing material does not solve the problem.

A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products
Eliminate: Out of scope. "Other electronic products".
B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most
other products shipped by mail-order companies
Eliminate: Out of scope. "Other mail order companies".
C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping
My choice. If the items were already defective before delivery, there is another problem. Apply the YES/NO test. YES, the returned items are damaged prior to shipment. This weakens the argument. NO - the items were not damaged. The argument holds and the culprit is Fedex.
D. Whether there are cases in which customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival of the product, is not discovered until later
Eliminate: Out of scope. We're not talking about what customers do. We're talking about said electronic company.
E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers
Eliminate: This statement doesn't do anything to the argument. If the company doesn't monitor the quality assurance department (defects), continuously monitoring the shippers won't fix an existing problem.

Kudos [?]: 11 [4], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
Posts: 76

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

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 14:37
From my point of view, C

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 3

Location: Mumbai
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 19:30
Should be D. It is necessary to evaluate how many products were actually damaged. Whether customers making false claims? If yes then no need of damage proof packaging

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 193

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 0

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 11:26
I would say C. plz share the OA as well.

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 780

Kudos [?]: 190 [0], given: 0

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 11:48
A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products [Hold]
B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most
other products shipped by mail-order companies [other products are not discussed as part of the argument. Moreover, if the products are not damaged at the rate that Manager mentions, then this choice has less relevance]
C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping [This may have effect on the Manager’s decision, but not once the decision has been implemented]
D. Whether there are cases in which customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival of the product, is not discovered until later [Irrelevant]
E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers [Monitoring has no effect on the argument]

Answer: A

Kudos [?]: 190 [0], given: 0

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 960

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 5

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 14:29
Si.

Kudos [?]: 304 [0], given: 5

Director
Director
User avatar
Status: Badgerine!
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 894

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 86

Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
Schools: Michigan (Ross) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
GPA: 3.3
WE: Project Management (Aerospace and Defense)
Reviews Badge
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 14:39
domleon wrote:
The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain
unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current
cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged
condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether
implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping


The manager is arguing that the cost of packing materials will go UP, but the cost of replacing products will go DOWN (offsetting each other). If the items are broken before they leave the warehouse, there isn't a packing material on the planet that's going to un-break them :)

The answer is C.
_________________

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 86

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 541 [1], given: 0

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Nov 2008, 00:23
1
This post received
KUDOS
The ans should be C definitely. The manager's proposal is effective only when the items are damaged during the shipping. but if the items are already broken, the we are only increasing the cost price by packing the damaged items with an expensive material. The items have to returned in any case.

Kudos [?]: 541 [1], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

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

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Feb 2009, 05:58
the assumption of the argument is: "good items are packed for shipping, and they get damaged after shipping, that is during transit".
A) A does not validate assumption - items may be vulnerable but what if shipping agency takes extra care while handling it.
B) does not substantiate assumption, answers only 50% of truth - more electronic products may get damaged in transit, but we want to know whether they are damaged before packing them for shipping, and what is the propotion of the goods that is damaged in transit and the goods that is already damaged before packaging it?
C) substantiates assumption in correctly in proper form
D/E) irrelevant

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

TOEFL Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1602

Kudos [?]: 600 [0], given: 40

Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Apr 2011, 10:04
The answer is C.
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 600 [0], given: 40

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 247

Kudos [?]: 238 [1], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jan 2012, 17:15
1
This post received
KUDOS
I am also for C.

That manager wanted to reduce costs by investing on advanced packing technology. So, here the assumption is - items were in good condition during package but got damaged during transit. if items were already in damaged condition at the time of packing, no matter how much care the company takes for transport, customers are going to return them which ultimately increases the cost.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Kudos [?]: 238 [1], given: 20

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 115

Kudos [?]: 150 [2], given: 15

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Apr 2012, 03:29
2
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products.
B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are
most other products shipped by mail-order companies.
C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping.
D. Whether there are cases where customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival, isn’t discovered until later.
E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers

Can someone explain this one?

Kudos [?]: 150 [2], given: 15

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 115

Kudos [?]: 150 [0], given: 15

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Apr 2012, 03:38
piyushksharma wrote:
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products.
B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are
most other products shipped by mail-order companies.
C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping.
D. Whether there are cases where customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival, isn’t discovered until later.
E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers

Can someone explain this one?


If the items while packing were damaged, and then those items were shipped, still TrueSave has to pay for the damaged item it was going to send to the customers. So it is important to determine that the products/items before packing were damaged or not, if they would have been damaged ones then there is no need to introduce the new packaging material, as the new packaging material would not help in rectifying the damage already caused before packing of the product.
According to me this was the what i got. If someone could tell me if it is correct interpretation of the question.

Kudos [?]: 150 [0], given: 15

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Posts: 143

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 107

GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.67
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2012, 06:27
piyushksharma wrote:
piyushksharma wrote:
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from its warehouses to customers worldwide. The company’s shipping manager is proposing that customer orders be packed with newer, more expensive packing materials that virtually eliminate damage during shipping. The manager argues that overall costs would essentially remain unaffected, since the extra cost of the new packing materials roughly equals the current cost of replacing products returned by customers because they arrived in damaged condition.

Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in determining whether implementing the shipping manager’s proposal would have the argued-for effect on costs?

A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products.
B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are
most other products shipped by mail-order companies.
C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping.
D. Whether there are cases where customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival, isn’t discovered until later.
E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers

Can someone explain this one?


If the items while packing were damaged, and then those items were shipped, still TrueSave has to pay for the damaged item it was going to send to the customers. So it is important to determine that the products/items before packing were damaged or not, if they would have been damaged ones then there is no need to introduce the new packaging material, as the new packaging material would not help in rectifying the damage already caused before packing of the product.
According to me this was the what i got. If someone could tell me if it is correct interpretation of the question.


You are correct.
Argument : Cost of extra packaging material = cost of replacing damaged product due to transit.
If the products are damaged before transit, introducing new packaging material is more costly than the old way of packaging. => C
Hope it helps.
_________________

Kudos!!!... If you think I help you in some ways....

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 107

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 303

Kudos [?]: 1263 [1], given: 2

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2012, 11:22
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
The manager's plan is only viable if it saves the corporation money. The manager believes that better packaging will lead to less broken merchandise and thus less money on replacement. To determine if this plan will work, we have to determine whether there isn't a possibility that, if true, could foil his plan.

A. Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring
damage during shipping than are typical electronic products.

The focus is on whether the packaging will prevent damaged products and thus replacements. Even if TrueSave packages are more vulnerable to incurring damage, better packaging could prevent damage.

B. Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are
most other products shipped by mail-order companies.


We care only about electronic products, and not other products.

C. Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage
already present when those items were packed for shipping. ANSWER


If there was already damage, then no amount of packaging can prevent damage. Think of it this way, even if you pack a broken DVD player in an iron safe (hardly a cost-effective shipping method :)), it will still arrive damaged, and the recipient will very likely ask for a replacement. So, in order to determine how effective the manager's plan will be, we have to determine what perfect of goods were already damaged before packing.

D. Whether there are cases where customers blame themselves for product
damage that, though present on arrival, isn’t discovered until later.


If customer's blame themselves, they are unlikely to return the product.

E. Whether TrueSave continually monitors the performance of the shipping
companies it uses to ship products to its customers.


If a customer asks for a replacement, TrueSave will have to provide it, and thus lose money. Whether the company is monitoring the shipping company is moot if the packaging is flimsy.
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep


Image

Image

Kudos [?]: 1263 [1], given: 2

3 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 561

Kudos [?]: 711 [3], given: 80

Location: India
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Nov 2013, 12:00
3
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
New Gmat club project
Click here


_________________

Regards,

S

Consider +1 KUDOS if you find this post useful

Kudos [?]: 711 [3], given: 80

Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i   [#permalink] 21 Nov 2013, 12:00

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 22 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from i

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


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®.