GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 22 Jan 2019, 08:47

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 in January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
  • The winners of the GMAT game show

     January 22, 2019

     January 22, 2019

     10:00 PM PST

     11:00 PM PST

    In case you didn’t notice, we recently held the 1st ever GMAT game show and it was awesome! See who won a full GMAT course, and register to the next one.
  • Key Strategies to Master GMAT SC

     January 26, 2019

     January 26, 2019

     07:00 AM PST

     09:00 AM PST

    Attend this webinar to learn how to leverage Meaning and Logic to solve the most challenging Sentence Correction Questions.

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

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

Hide Tags

 
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 149
Location: Vienna, Austria
TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 25 Dec 2018, 00:29
3
11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

81% (00:58) correct 19% (01:09) wrong based on 746 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

Originally posted by domleon on 16 Nov 2008, 05:57.
Last edited by hazelnut on 25 Dec 2018, 00:29, edited 3 times in total.
Most Helpful Community Reply
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Posts: 45
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 11:43
5
1
2
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.
General Discussion
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1266
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 10:39
C for me as well.

If a lot of products have damage before shipping, manager's proposal will cost more.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Mumbai
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2008, 18:30
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
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 702
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 10:48
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
Director
Director
User avatar
Status: Badgerine!
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 889
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  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 13:39
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

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1099
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Nov 2008, 23:23
1
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.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2009
Posts: 1
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Feb 2009, 04:58
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
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 181
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  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jan 2012, 16:15
1
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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 70
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  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Apr 2012, 02:29
2
1
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?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 70
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  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Apr 2012, 02:38
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.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Feb 2012
Posts: 129
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.67
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2012, 05:27
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....

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 301
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2012, 10:22
2
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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 430
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  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Nov 2013, 11:00
3
1
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
D
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8804
Location: Pune, India
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Dec 2018, 04:16
domleon 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 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


Here is the (A) vs (C) comparison.

Manager's Proposal: Use newer, more expensive packing that eliminates damage during transport.

Argued-for effect - 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.

Extra cost of new packing = Cost of replacing products because they arrived damaged

What is most important to ascertain (evaluate) to know if argued-for effect will happen?

(A) Whether the products shipped by TrueSave are more vulnerable to incurring damage during shipping than are typical electronic products
It doesn't matter whether TrueSave's products are more vulnerable, less vulnerable or have same vulnerability compared with typical electronic products.
What we know is extra cost of packing is same as cost of replacing products arriving damaged on arrival. Whether the cost of products arriving damaged at arrival is less/more or same as this cost for typical electronic products, we don't care. All we want to establish is that our cost will essentially stay the same. How it compares with the cost that others incur is irrelevant.


(B) Whether electronic products are damaged more frequently in transit than are most other products shipped by mail-order companies
The comparison is not between such costs incurred for electronic products vs other products. The only aim is that TrueSave's cost should not increase.

(C) Whether a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping
We know Extra cost of new packing = Cost of replacing products because they arrived damaged
But here is the twist - what if the products that arrive damaged are damaged before they are shipped? They would be damaged upon arrival and the new packing will not save them. They will be returned and that cost will be incurred.

Answer: "Yes, a sizable proportion of returned items are returned because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping"
Then cost of replacing products will stay high. So the reduction in this cost will not cancel off the extra cost of packing. Hence the argued-for effect will not be seen.

Answer" "No, a sizable proportion of returned items are returned NOT because of damage already present when those items were packed for shipping"
So most products that get returned are due to damage while shipping. The new packing will make it non existent. Hence the extra cost of packing would equal cost of replacing products and the argued-for effect will be seen.

Answer (C)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT Club Bot
Re: TrueSave is a mail-order company that ships electronic products from &nbs [#permalink] 24 Dec 2018, 04:16
Display posts from previous: Sort by

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

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.