Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Save up to $1,000 on select GMAT prep now. This Fall, achieve your most ambitious goals with millions of student success stories behind you.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Aug 3110:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM EDT
Top Scores Start with a Elite Online Prep Course. Enroll for 6 months of access to over 400 hours of GMAT video lessons AND 715+ Score Guarantee!
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sept. 6, 9:30am-12:30pm EST
Sep 0907:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway
Oct 1308:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Oct. 13, 2026 - Jan. 7, 2027, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
21 Feb 2026, 21:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
Many startups present aggressive user growth projections to attract funding, but such forecasts often lead to unsustainable burn rates and eventual failure. One firm recently projected a tenfold increase in users within twelve months, despite having a small engineering team and minimal marketing spend. Skepticism about these projections arose, given that similar firms with greater resources had grown more slowly. Nonetheless, funding was approved based on the founder’s proven execution history and a pre-launch distribution partnership with a major platform.
In the argument above, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
In the argument above, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
21 Feb 2026, 21:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Many startups present aggressive user growth projections to attract funding, but such forecasts often lead to unsustainable burn rates and eventual failure. One firm recently projected a tenfold increase in users within twelve months, despite having a small engineering team and minimal marketing spend. [b]Skepticism about these projections arose, given that similar firms with greater resources had grown more slowly. Nonetheless, funding was approved based on the founder’s proven execution history and a pre-launch distribution partnership with a major platform.
In the argument above, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
[/b]
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
This says the second boldface “accepts the doubt and abandons the plan.” But that’s not what happened as the funding was approved anyway. So this is wrong because the second boldface does not say “we rejected the forecast”; it says “we funded them anyway.”
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
This says the second boldface is “unrelated” to the first. But it’s actually very related and it’s the reason they funded the startup despite the doubt. So this is also wrong because the second boldface isn’t random; it directly addresses the first.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
This says the second boldface is about “a broader market dynamic.” But it’s not, it’s about the founder’s track record and a distribution deal, not market conditions.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
This sounds right. First boldface = objection based on history (other companies with more resources had grown slower). Second boldface = reason they still funded anyway (founder track record plus partnership), a factor that outweighed the objection.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
This says the second boldface is a “conclusion” that contradicts the first. But the second boldface isn’t a conclusion; it’s a reason they went ahead. Also, it’s not about a “more compelling assumption”; it’s about concrete evidence (founder track record, partnership).
Answer: D
Many startups present aggressive user growth projections to attract funding, but such forecasts often lead to unsustainable burn rates and eventual failure. One firm recently projected a tenfold increase in users within twelve months, despite having a small engineering team and minimal marketing spend. [b]Skepticism about these projections arose, given that similar firms with greater resources had grown more slowly. Nonetheless, funding was approved based on the founder’s proven execution history and a pre-launch distribution partnership with a major platform.
In the argument above, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
[/b]
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
A. The first is a challenge to the plausibility of a strategic forecast; the second accepts that challenge and concludes the forecast should be abandoned.
This says the second boldface “accepts the doubt and abandons the plan.” But that’s not what happened as the funding was approved anyway. So this is wrong because the second boldface does not say “we rejected the forecast”; it says “we funded them anyway.”
B. The first identifies a structural weakness in a proposed plan; the second presents an unrelated consideration that supports the plan nonetheless.
This says the second boldface is “unrelated” to the first. But it’s actually very related and it’s the reason they funded the startup despite the doubt. So this is also wrong because the second boldface isn’t random; it directly addresses the first.
C. The first offers evidence against the feasibility of a projection; the second qualifies that evidence by introducing a broader market dynamic.
This says the second boldface is about “a broader market dynamic.” But it’s not, it’s about the founder’s track record and a distribution deal, not market conditions.
D. The first introduces an objection based on historical precedent; the second provides a contrasting factor that outweighed the objection in determining a course of action.
This sounds right. First boldface = objection based on history (other companies with more resources had grown slower). Second boldface = reason they still funded anyway (founder track record plus partnership), a factor that outweighed the objection.
E. The first raises a reason to reject a proposed action; the second is a conclusion that contradicts that rejection by relying on a more compelling assumption.
This says the second boldface is a “conclusion” that contradicts the first. But the second boldface isn’t a conclusion; it’s a reason they went ahead. Also, it’s not about a “more compelling assumption”; it’s about concrete evidence (founder track record, partnership).
Answer: D
09 Mar 2026, 22:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
I didn't got the idea that how phrase " historical precedent " relates to other companies.
