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

It is currently 18 Oct 2019, 04:13

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

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
VP
VP
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 1257
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jan 2019, 16:27
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utrania oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic condition, together with less restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because __________.

(A) the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.

(B) the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.

(C) most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.

(D) new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.

(E) many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

Premises:
Utrania was an exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields.
So exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted.
Utrania's economic condition is improving and regulations are less restrictive now so rapid development of new fields will happen

Conclusion:
It would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports ...

because...
- Here we are looking for a premise. Something that will tell us why the author is saying the the new fields may not result in higher oil exports.

What can we expect? Either that the oil will be needed internally so will not be available for export or that there will not be much outside demand for Utrania oil.


How the red part is possible VeritasKarishma ? As an importer, I'm always ready to import Utrania's oil. I think, this won't be a reasonable way to explain what is going on OUTSIDE of Utrania (like reluctant to import Utrania's oil); the perfect reason would be something that is happening INSIDE of Utrania. Could you correct me if I'm wrong, please?
Thanks__
_________________
“The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained in sudden flight but, they while their companions slept, they were toiling upwards in the night.”
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Do you need official questions for Quant?
3700 Unique Official GMAT Quant Questions
------
SEARCH FOR ALL TAGS
GMAT Club Tests
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9706
Location: Pune, India
Re: Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jan 2019, 03:41
AsadAbu wrote:
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utrania oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic condition, together with less restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because __________.

(A) the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.

(B) the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.

(C) most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.

(D) new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.

(E) many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

Premises:
Utrania was an exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields.
So exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted.
Utrania's economic condition is improving and regulations are less restrictive now so rapid development of new fields will happen

Conclusion:
It would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports ...

because...
- Here we are looking for a premise. Something that will tell us why the author is saying the the new fields may not result in higher oil exports.

What can we expect? Either that the oil will be needed internally so will not be available for export or that there will not be much outside demand for Utrania oil.


How the red part is possible VeritasKarishma ? As an importer, I'm always ready to import Utrania's oil. I think, this won't be a reasonable way to explain what is going on OUTSIDE of Utrania (like reluctant to import Utrania's oil); the perfect reason would be something that is happening INSIDE of Utrania. Could you correct me if I'm wrong, please?
Thanks__


How about much cheaper oil available from a new source? That may reduce the demand for Utranian oil outside. The point is that the author is going to give a reason why exports may not jump up. It could have to do with lower supply or lower demand.
_________________
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 >
VP
VP
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 1257
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 20 Jan 2019, 17:10
Hi MartyMurray,
Sir, May I have your attention please. The makes me crazy!

VeritasKarishma wrote:
AsadAbu wrote:
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utrania oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic condition, together with less restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because __________.

(A) the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.

(B) the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.

(C) most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.

(D) new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.

(E) many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

Premises:
Utrania was an exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields.
So exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted.
Utrania's economic condition is improving and regulations are less restrictive now so rapid development of new fields will happen

Conclusion:
It would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports ...

because...
- Here we are looking for a premise. Something that will tell us why the author is saying the the new fields may not result in higher oil exports.

What can we expect? Either that the oil will be needed internally so will not be available for export or that there will not be much outside demand for Utrania oil.


How the red part is possible VeritasKarishma ? As an importer, I'm always ready to import Utrania's oil. I think, this won't be a reasonable way to explain what is going on OUTSIDE of Utrania (like reluctant to import Utrania's oil); the perfect reason would be something that is happening INSIDE of Utrania. Could you correct me if I'm wrong, please?
Thanks__


How about much cheaper oil available from a new source? That may reduce the demand for Utranian oil outside. The point is that the author is going to give a reason why exports may not jump up. It could have to do with lower supply or lower demand.

One prominent expert says that we can't weaken the following statement by just saying: I'm not a gmatclub member.
Here is the statement: I'm a gmatclub member.

In this CR, we need a reason why we WON'T EXPORT MORE. To weaken this one if we say SOMEONE WON'T IMPORT MORE, then won't it resemble the green part above?
Thanks__
_________________
“The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained in sudden flight but, they while their companions slept, they were toiling upwards in the night.”
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Do you need official questions for Quant?
3700 Unique Official GMAT Quant Questions
------
SEARCH FOR ALL TAGS
GMAT Club Tests

Originally posted by Asad on 06 Jan 2019, 16:29.
Last edited by Asad on 20 Jan 2019, 17:10, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jul 2016
Posts: 69
Location: United States (NY)
Schools: Johnson '22
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Re: Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jan 2019, 17:47
Karishma is just saying that you cannot sell something when there is no demand. your statement - I'm a gmatclub member destroys your first claim I'm not a gmatclub member.
Target Test Prep Representative
User avatar
P
Status: Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Posts: 618
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Re: Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jan 2019, 19:22
AsadAbu wrote:
Hi MartyMurray,
Sir, May I have your attention please. The makes me crazy!

VeritasKarishma wrote:
How about much cheaper oil available from a new source? That may reduce the demand for Utranian oil outside. The point is that the author is going to give a reason why exports may not jump up. It could have to do with lower supply or lower demand.

One prominent expert says that we can't weaken the following statement by just saying: I'm not a gmatclub member.
Here is the statement: I'm a gmatclub member.

In this CR, we need a reason why we WON'T EXPORT MORE. To weaken this one if we say SOMEONE WON'T IMPORT MORE, then won't it resemble the green part above?
Thanks__

The statement in green above is different from "Someone won't import more." The statement in green, "I'm not a gmatclub member." is a direct contradiction of the other statement, "I'm a gmatclub member." I am not sure what a direct contradiction of a conclusion does to an argument. Does it weaken it? or nullify it?

In any case, you won't see such a direct contradiction in a CR question, and an answer choice indicating that "Someone won't import more" would not be a direct contradiction of the conclusion that Utrania will export more. It weakens the support for that conclusion by indicating that, even though new oil fields may be developed, there won't be any buyers, and thus, there will not be any IMPETUS for exporting oil. So, it provides a reason to call the conclusion that exports will increase into question.

To correctly answer CR questions, you have to be more holistic in your thinking than you have been. In this case, what would happen in the real world if it were the case that nobody wants oil? Would a country be likely to export it? Of course not.

On another note, there is no reason really to even worry about this issue, as, clearly, one choice will provide a reason to call the conclusion into question, and we don't need to figure out in advance how that choice will do so. For one thing, what the correct answer says may be totally different from what we expected. In this case, it could say that:

There is a shortage of steel, so there is no way to build more oil tankers, and, currently all tankers are being used as much as possible.

All countries worldwide are seeking to reduce their use of oil.

The oil left in the ground in Utrania is low grade oil that no buyers want.

The worldwide supply of natural gas, a substitute for oil, is expected to triple next year, driving its price to half its current level.

We could go on and on.

So, your best bet is to understand the question and find a choice that gets the job done, rather than seek to determine what you will find before you find it.
_________________

Marty Murray

Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Marty@targettestprep.com
TTP - Target Test Prep Logo
122 Reviews

5-star rated online GMAT quant
self study course

See why Target Test Prep is the top rated GMAT quant course on GMAT Club. Read Our Reviews

If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Kudos" button.

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 02 May 2015
Posts: 11
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Apr 2019, 11:09
Please correct me if I am thinking more than needed:

Option B, as it sounds, would create a demand of fuel oil (which means refined oil). The argument is talking about the export of field oil,which means crude oil from fields. Doesn't it take a long leap to assume that increase in automobiles would create a domestic demand of fuel oil, which in turn would create a domestic demand of crude oil. Since it takes established refineries to convert crude oil into fuel oil, is it reasonable to assume that there are sufficient number of refineries available in the country to create a domestic demand for crude oil?
GMAT Club Bot
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades   [#permalink] 24 Apr 2019, 11:09

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades

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





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne