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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Does GMAT RC seem like an uphill battle? e-GMAT is conducting a free webinar to help you learn reading strategies that can enable you to solve 700+ level RC questions with at least 90% accuracy in less than 10 days.
Attend a Veritas Prep GMAT Class for Free. With free trial classes you can work with a 99th percentile expert free of charge. Learn valuable strategies and find your new favorite instructor; click for a list of upcoming dates and teachers.
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 01 Nov 2018, 23:04
12
128
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
95% (hard)
Question Stats:
53% (02:07) correct 47% (02:23) wrong based on 3186 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread, one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme?
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them.
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
(D) Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves.
(E) Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available.
The words helps to explain in the question stem indicates that this is an Explain the Discrepancy question.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
Vets get $ from pdts
mnf wants ads for pdt in mail
↑ qual pdt
BUT
vets refuse ads for pdt
Note: pdt stands for product and mnf stands for manufacturer.
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Discrepancy questions, the goal is to find an answer choice that makes the unexpected result less surprising. In this case, why would veterinarians refuse to do something that could increase their profit, especially when the products in question are of high quality?
On Discrepancy questions, the most common trap answer will heighten the discrepancy. This is not the goal. Rather, you are trying to find something that will make the situation less surprising.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) If the veterinarians are selling these products already, then advertising could lead to more sales. This would increase the financial incentive to comply with the manufacturer's request, exacerbating the discrepancy.
(B) More promotional activity is likely to lead to more sales and therefore more profit for the veterinarians. If anything, this makes the discrepancy worse.
(C) CORRECT. If these products are sold in stores, pet owners could opt to buy them in regular stores, not vet offices. This explains why an increase in advertisement might not lead to an increase in profits for the veterinarians, in turn explaining why the vets would refuse to include the advertisements.
(D) The argument indicates that this product is high quality, so it would seem that the veterinarians would want to promote these high-quality products to their customers. If anything, this choice makes the discrepancy worse.
(E) The products in the argument are described as pet-care products. Products made for people are not relevant to this argument.
Evaluation of a Plan
Situation Veterinarians generally derive some income from selling various manufacturers' pet-care products, but very few veterinarians accepted free promotional materials from one such manufacturer to mail to their clients.
Reasoning What would most help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the free promotional materials to mail to their clients? The passage says that veterinarians generally derive income from selling pet-care products, which suggests that it should have been in many veterinarians' financial interest to accept and mail out the free promotional materials to increase sales. Any evidence that mailing out these specific promotional materials from this manufacturer would not actually have been in many veterinarians' financial interest could help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the materials.
(A) This suggests that most of the veterinarians should have had a financial interest in accepting and mailing out the promotional materials in order to increase their sales of the manufacturer's products.
(B) Even if the promotional materials supplemented the manufacturer's usual promotional activities, they could still have increased the veterinarians' sales of the manufacturer's products and thus generated more income for the veterinarians.
(C) Correct. If this manufacturer's products are available in pet stores and supermarkets but most other products sold by veterinarians are not, then distributing the manufacturer's promotional materials could have encouraged customers to buy this manufacturer's products from pet stores and supermarkets rather than to buy competing products from the veterinarians. Thus, the veterinarians may have been concerned that the promotions would reduce their profits.
(D) The passage says the manufacturer's products are of high quality, so we have no reason to suppose that clients' demand for quality products would discourage veterinarians from accepting the manufacturer's promotional materials.
(E) Presumably the manufacturer's products are specially formulated for pets, so any products veterinarians recommend only when no specially formulated pet-care products are available would not reduce the veterinarians' interest in promoting the manufacturer's products.
Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 13 Dec 2017, 00:29
23
Top Contributor
7
Here is the paradox --
1. Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. A manufacturer offered free promotional material to veterinarians to mail to their clients. The manufacturer's products were of high quality 2. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer.
We have been asked to explain why #2 happened -- a rather surprising result given #1. Let us take a look at the answer options --
Option A - Incorrect
A does not explain why "very few veterinarians accepted the offer". Since most of them were already selling the manufacturer's products, there is no reason for them to not accept these promotional materials to keep their clients engaged to increase sales.
Option B - Incorrect
This also does not explain WHY very few veterinarians accepted the offer.
Option C - Correct answer
This explains why very few of them chose the offer. Since the products were available at pet stores and supermarkets and if the vet recommends them by sending free promotional material (and we know that pet owners rarely throw away mails from the vet), clients may not purchase products from the vet, directly affecting his/her source of income.
Option D - Incorrect
Worsens the discrepancy since we already know the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Option E - Incorrect
Does not explain why veterinarians did not accept the offer.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jun 2017, 12:14
4
1
Nice question!
In my opinion, it's a clear C.
The reason is that if this manufacturer sends free promotional material to all the veterinarian's clients, and this material is available in malls and other supermarkets, there is a good chance that the clients don't come back to the vet(for the purchase) and his sales reduce.
Since the vet stocks other manufacturer's products, he/she will be able to sell more products if he/she has exclusive rights to sell the manufacturer's products.
_________________
You've got what it takes, but it will take everything you've got
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jul 2017, 03:16
1
CrackVerbalGMAT wrote:
Here is the paradox --
1. Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. A manufacturer offered free promotional material to veterinarians to mail to their clients. The manufacturer's products were of high quality 2. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer.
We have been asked to explain why #2 happened -- a rather surprising result given #1. Let us take a look at the answer options --
Option A - Incorrect
A does not explain why "very few veterinarians accepted the offer". Since most of them were already selling the manufacturer's products, there is no reason for them to not accept these promotional materials to keep their clients engaged to increase sales.
The Option A states that "Most" of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
The Vets who were already selling the manufacturer's products have incentive not to give the material for free when the customers are actually paying for it, that is the reason why MANY vets REJECTED the offer and why very FEW accepted . The FEW who accepted would be the one's who are not already selling the manufacturer's products.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jul 2017, 07:00
1
1
kunal1608 wrote:
CrackVerbalGMAT wrote:
Here is the paradox --
1. Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. A manufacturer offered free promotional material to veterinarians to mail to their clients. The manufacturer's products were of high quality 2. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer.
We have been asked to explain why #2 happened -- a rather surprising result given #1. Let us take a look at the answer options --
Option A - Incorrect
A does not explain why "very few veterinarians accepted the offer". Since most of them were already selling the manufacturer's products, there is no reason for them to not accept these promotional materials to keep their clients engaged to increase sales.
The Option A states that "Most" of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
The Vets who were already selling the manufacturer's products have incentive not to give the material for free when the customers are actually paying for it, that is the reason why MANY vets REJECTED the offer and why very FEW accepted . The FEW who accepted would be the one's who are not already selling the manufacturer's products.
IS this an ASSUMPTION i am making ?
Thanks
What I believe is veterinarians have to pay to manufacturers or the wholesale dealers for the promotional materials that they send to the end customers. That's how it would work in the real world. Veterinarians are like retailers from whom the pet owners will buy pet products. Here in the argument a manufacturer has offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. So end customers or pet owners will not pay anything to any manufacturer to get promotional materials. We have to find the possible reason that would explain WHY the veterinarians did not accept the offer made by manufacturer even though products are of high quality.
Option A says: Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. This is not giving answer to WHY. Infact, this option is supporting to a hypothetical idea: what veterinarians did was wrong. Thus, A is not the answer.
Correct answer is C, which says: The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets. The pet products for which promotional materials veterinarians are sending to their clients are exclusively available at their end. Those products are not available anywhere else. But in this case, the manufacturer's products are available in pet stores and in supermarkets. What if customers will get to know about the given products from the veterinarians' mail, but they buy those products at other places? If this happens, veterinarians will lose their sales. That is why very few veterinarians accepted the manufacturer's offer. As option C answers to WHY. This is the correct answer.
_________________
As explained in this post by CrackVerbalGMAT, if most of those veterinarians were already selling the products to their clients, they would WANT to accept and mail the free promotional materials. The first sentence of the passage tells us that veterinarians generally derive some of their income from sales of such products. Sending out free promotional materials might boost sales of those products and, thus, increase the veterinarians' income.
_________________
Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
05 May 2018, 21:09
2
Premise: 1. if mail sent from vet, pet owners rarely through away the mail. 2. use above for marketing their product, manufacturers offered vets a deal. 3. vets rejected it even the offer was lucrative.
paradox - vets rejected the offer even the offer was lucrative.
pre-thinking - something wrong with promotional materials. Though products are of high quality, they may be less in quantity, we need to think something in these lines.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme? A. Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. --- so going forward and taking the deal should not be a problem. B. The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them. ---- so going forward and taking the deal should not be a problem. C. The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets. --- so all these products are available in market. if promoted by vet, people may go to supermarkets and purchase it. seems like a reason to reject. D. Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves.--- irrelevant argument. E. Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available. --- irrelevant argument.
_________________
Simple strategy: “Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Sep 2018, 14:11
Quote:
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread, one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Situation: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. 2. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread Intended Input: one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Unintended Outcome: Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme?
Resolve the Paradox
Quote:
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
As we already know here that "Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products." then if veterinarians were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients then veterinarians would have readily accepted the product, as a free sample would have just added to their sales. But denying the promotional material isn't explained by the answer option.
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them.
Quote:
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
This resolves the paradox as unlike other competing products sold by veterinarians, this product is available in the pet stores and in supermarkets. So if the customer likes this product then the customer would not necessarily go to the veterinarian to buy the product, but rather purchase the product from his/her nearest convenience. Hence impacting the sales of the veterinarian. Ultimately impacting their income. Hence this option stands out.
(D) Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves.
(E) Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Sep 2018, 15:34
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
Veterinarians will not benefit much from promoting the new product ... pet owners can buy from other places
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Feb 2019, 05:28
1
Hey Guys! I think the difficult part of this question is how to structure the information.
Key words: Derive, income, mails read, free promotional materials on its products, high quality.
For me, the crucial word is "materials on its products". It means only the free ads or posters are offered.
So we can structure the paragraphe like this: Ads ---->clients--->sales----->derive income from sales
let's have a look about the choices: Ads --B-->clients--A->sales---C-->derive income from sales; D and E will not be in this logic line.
(A)The products are already on sales so that the mater is how the ads would increase sales (then to increase vet's income). We are not sure if the ads would help.
(B) Same as choice A. But this one has more uncertainty as a mesure of increasing the amount of ads. We don't see the connections between income and ads.
(C) This one could be intepreted as the same as A and B. But the difference is that the products are sold in several places. Even if the ads did work out to increase the sales, it could be a rise in supermarkets thus would not increase vet's income. Otherwise vet wouldn't be motivated to do the free ads.
_________________
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
27 May 2019, 08:13
Hi GMATNinjaegmat and experts I would be really grateful if you could help.
As per the above mentioned explanations, I do understand that "C" is the best answer available BUT from more generalized point of view, is it not wrong to associate assumptions with the options, just as we are doing in this case with "C". for e.g. we are assuming here that (1) people prefer going to pet stores and supermarkets to veterinarians (2) promotional materials are distributed at all levels to attract people (3) even if promotional materials are distributed at all levels, customers would be encouraged to buy it from stores and supermarkets rather than to buy products from veterinarians.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 Jun 2019, 06:45
Neelaksh wrote:
Hi GMATNinjaegmat and experts I would be really grateful if you could help.
As per the above mentioned explanations, I do understand that "C" is the best answer available BUT from more generalized point of view, is it not wrong to associate assumptions with the options, just as we are doing in this case with "C". for e.g. we are assuming here that (1) people prefer going to pet stores and supermarkets to veterinarians (2) promotional materials are distributed at all levels to attract people (3) even if promotional materials are distributed at all levels, customers would be encouraged to buy it from stores and supermarkets rather than to buy products from veterinarians.
Thanks
To conclude that (C) is the correct answer choice, we do not need to assume that people actually WOULD go to other stores rather than buy the products at the veterinary clinic -- we only need to show that this is a possibility that COULD occur, and that therefore (C) provides information that most helps to explain the vets' reaction.
Using POE for the other answer choices (which can be found in the OE and in this post by @CrackVerbalGMAT), it is clear that (C) is the only option that offers a potentially valid reason for veterinarians to refuse the promotional materials. So, we can say that (C) "most helps explain the veterinarians' reaction," even if it is not absolutely certain that people prefer to purchase the products at a pet store.
Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Hi - I interpreted option A as below. Can you help me with where my understanding is incorrect?
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. - If they are already selling the products then why would they want to send free products to clients? Wouldnt this reduce sales?
Hi - I interpreted option A as below. Can you help me with where my understanding is incorrect?
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. - If they are already selling the products then why would they want to send free products to clients? Wouldnt this reduce sales?
Thanks.
I agree.
A. Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. ---
If their clients are already buying the products from the vet, for example, a 100ml liquid solution for pets, then, by giving them free samples (say 20ml), it will take longer from the clients to buy a new one for replacement. That's why you don't give free perfume or make-up samples to customers who are already using and buying them regularly.
C. The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets. ---
Yes, people may buy it at the supermarkets. But if they are sold at the same price, there is still a chance that they will get from the vet since clients might get it from the vet right after consultation for the sake of convenience and there is no additional costs for the vet to do it. So, potential extra revenue stream for the vet, why would the vet not take the offer?
Unless "unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians" implies that the vet is already selling substitutes (equally good competing products) and therefore introducing a product that is available at the supermarket will actually hurt the sales of those substitutes the vet is already selling.
Can someone give me a convincing explanation? [/color]
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Oct 2019, 06:01
Skywalker18 wrote:
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread, one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme?
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them.
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
(D) Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves.
(E) Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available.
The words helps to explain in the question stem indicates that this is an Explain the Discrepancy question.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
Vets get $ from pdts
mnf wants ads for pdt in mail
↑ qual pdt
BUT
vets refuse ads for pdt
Note: pdt stands for product and mnf stands for manufacturer.
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Discrepancy questions, the goal is to find an answer choice that makes the unexpected result less surprising. In this case, why would veterinarians refuse to do something that could increase their profit, especially when the products in question are of high quality?
On Discrepancy questions, the most common trap answer will heighten the discrepancy. This is not the goal. Rather, you are trying to find something that will make the situation less surprising.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) If the veterinarians are selling these products already, then advertising could lead to more sales. This would increase the financial incentive to comply with the manufacturer's request, exacerbating the discrepancy.
(B) More promotional activity is likely to lead to more sales and therefore more profit for the veterinarians. If anything, this makes the discrepancy worse.
(C) CORRECT. If these products are sold in stores, pet owners could opt to buy them in regular stores, not vet offices. This explains why an increase in advertisement might not lead to an increase in profits for the veterinarians, in turn explaining why the vets would refuse to include the advertisements.
(D) The argument indicates that this product is high quality, so it would seem that the veterinarians would want to promote these high-quality products to their customers. If anything, this choice makes the discrepancy worse.
(E) The products in the argument are described as pet-care products. Products made for people are not relevant to this argument.
Evaluation of a Plan
Situation Veterinarians generally derive some income from selling various manufacturers' pet-care products, but very few veterinarians accepted free promotional materials from one such manufacturer to mail to their clients.
Reasoning What would most help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the free promotional materials to mail to their clients? The passage says that veterinarians generally derive income from selling pet-care products, which suggests that it should have been in many veterinarians' financial interest to accept and mail out the free promotional materials to increase sales. Any evidence that mailing out these specific promotional materials from this manufacturer would not actually have been in many veterinarians' financial interest could help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the materials.
(A) This suggests that most of the veterinarians should have had a financial interest in accepting and mailing out the promotional materials in order to increase their sales of the manufacturer's products.
(B) Even if the promotional materials supplemented the manufacturer's usual promotional activities, they could still have increased the veterinarians' sales of the manufacturer's products and thus generated more income for the veterinarians.
(C) Correct. If this manufacturer's products are available in pet stores and supermarkets but most other products sold by veterinarians are not, then distributing the manufacturer's promotional materials could have encouraged customers to buy this manufacturer's products from pet stores and supermarkets rather than to buy competing products from the veterinarians. Thus, the veterinarians may have been concerned that the promotions would reduce their profits.
(D) The passage says the manufacturer's products are of high quality, so we have no reason to suppose that clients' demand for quality products would discourage veterinarians from accepting the manufacturer's promotional materials.
(E) Presumably the manufacturer's products are specially formulated for pets, so any products veterinarians recommend only when no specially formulated pet-care products are available would not reduce the veterinarians' interest in promoting the manufacturer's products.
We need to find a reason why vets might not recommend the material to their clients even though the products are of good quality. ok. Given that, what comes to my mind. We need to find something which will reduce the benefits which vets are already getting if not increase it.
A: Contender. Yes it will decrease the benefits but not for sure..maybe more people start buying at the vets get more money in the end. Just like domino's/ little ceasers buy 1 get 1 promotions. There weak choice. B: Fine. So what. Irrelevant C: Contender. This definitely will decrease the benefits. Indeed a strong one. D: Irrelevant E: Irrelevant
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Oct 2019, 12:30
kanikab and chrisbrain2019 Some ideas: I think option A is weaker because of the following: It seems that you are assuming that materials equal samples; but I think the question suggests that the material is written because the question states that "mail from their pet's veterinarian unread". If one considers the material to be flyers, the vet can send the info to everybody with no harm, even if they are already buying the product. The most likely scenario is that the pamphlets will help to sell more products.
Answer choice c) seems a bit more direct. If the equivalent products are already being sold, adding competition to the mix does not seems like a good idea.
One could think of situations in which option c) would be beneficial, but they require assumptions, I gather that it is better to keep the assumptions to the minimum.
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Nov 2019, 03:52
3
Skywalker18 wrote:
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread, one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme?
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them.
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
(D) Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves.
(E) Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available.
The words helps to explain in the question stem indicates that this is an Explain the Discrepancy question.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
Vets get $ from pdts
mnf wants ads for pdt in mail
↑ qual pdt
BUT
vets refuse ads for pdt
Note: pdt stands for product and mnf stands for manufacturer.
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Discrepancy questions, the goal is to find an answer choice that makes the unexpected result less surprising. In this case, why would veterinarians refuse to do something that could increase their profit, especially when the products in question are of high quality?
On Discrepancy questions, the most common trap answer will heighten the discrepancy. This is not the goal. Rather, you are trying to find something that will make the situation less surprising.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) If the veterinarians are selling these products already, then advertising could lead to more sales. This would increase the financial incentive to comply with the manufacturer's request, exacerbating the discrepancy.
(B) More promotional activity is likely to lead to more sales and therefore more profit for the veterinarians. If anything, this makes the discrepancy worse.
(C) CORRECT. If these products are sold in stores, pet owners could opt to buy them in regular stores, not vet offices. This explains why an increase in advertisement might not lead to an increase in profits for the veterinarians, in turn explaining why the vets would refuse to include the advertisements.
(D) The argument indicates that this product is high quality, so it would seem that the veterinarians would want to promote these high-quality products to their customers. If anything, this choice makes the discrepancy worse.
(E) The products in the argument are described as pet-care products. Products made for people are not relevant to this argument.
Evaluation of a Plan
Situation Veterinarians generally derive some income from selling various manufacturers' pet-care products, but very few veterinarians accepted free promotional materials from one such manufacturer to mail to their clients.
Reasoning What would most help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the free promotional materials to mail to their clients? The passage says that veterinarians generally derive income from selling pet-care products, which suggests that it should have been in many veterinarians' financial interest to accept and mail out the free promotional materials to increase sales. Any evidence that mailing out these specific promotional materials from this manufacturer would not actually have been in many veterinarians' financial interest could help explain why so few veterinarians accepted the materials.
(A) This suggests that most of the veterinarians should have had a financial interest in accepting and mailing out the promotional materials in order to increase their sales of the manufacturer's products.
(B) Even if the promotional materials supplemented the manufacturer's usual promotional activities, they could still have increased the veterinarians' sales of the manufacturer's products and thus generated more income for the veterinarians.
(C) Correct. If this manufacturer's products are available in pet stores and supermarkets but most other products sold by veterinarians are not, then distributing the manufacturer's promotional materials could have encouraged customers to buy this manufacturer's products from pet stores and supermarkets rather than to buy competing products from the veterinarians. Thus, the veterinarians may have been concerned that the promotions would reduce their profits.
(D) The passage says the manufacturer's products are of high quality, so we have no reason to suppose that clients' demand for quality products would discourage veterinarians from accepting the manufacturer's promotional materials.
(E) Presumably the manufacturer's products are specially formulated for pets, so any products veterinarians recommend only when no specially formulated pet-care products are available would not reduce the veterinarians' interest in promoting the manufacturer's products.
(A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients.
If this was the case then why would the veterinarians reject the offer? It doesn't make any sense.
Quote:
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them.
If anything, if this was true the veterinarians should have accepted the offer to further attract customers and make a better profit.
Quote:
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets.
As per this choice, if the veterinarians accept the offer, they would be helping their competitors. Because unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, the products by the manufacturer are available at other places. So veterinarians would be promoting products that the customer might purchase elsewhere. This may reduce the potential profit of veterinarians.
Each of the choices D and E would not have any effect on the decision made by veterinarians and hence is wrong.
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
04 Dec 2019, 08:19
Quote:
Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling several manufacturers' lines of pet-care products. Knowing that pet owners rarely throw away mail from their pet's veterinarian unread, one manufacturer of pet-care products offered free promotional materials on its products to veterinarians for mailing to their clients. Very few veterinarians accepted the offer, however, even though the manufacturer's products are of high quality.
BID: V makes money from selling pet-care. One company sends them free promotional stuff but majority reject. Quality is good.
Type: Paradox. Why? (By the reading the stem, you probably figure out that it is going to ask you to resolve the paradox)
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the veterinarian's reaction to the manufacturer's promotional scheme? (A) Most of the veterinarians to whom the free promotional materials were offered were already selling the manufacturer's pet-care products to their clients. - While I did pick A, it is definitely wrong. If you're already selling then you will be delighted to offer promotions for the same. Imagine this, you are already selling Adidas shoes. You got a mail from Adidas saying 30% off. Why will you not pass it on to increase your own sales/cut?. I hate it but it is that extra layer of thinking which makes this choice incorrect.
(B) The special promotional materials were intended as a supplement to the manufacturer's usual promotional activities rather than as a replacement for them. - Out Of Focus
(C) The manufacturer's products, unlike most equally good competing products sold by veterinarians, are also available in pet stores and in supermarkets. - The key part is unlike most equally good competing products. Well, if everything you sell is not available in stores but the promotional you got is available in store then you know even if you send it out to customers they won't be as much interested as they would be otherwise. And hence the V will reject the promotional offer/won't pass on.
(D) Many pet owners have begun demanding quality in products they buy for their pets that is as high as that in products they buy for themselves. - Kind of 180 degrees. We are already told it is of good quality.
(E) Veterinarians sometimes recommend that pet owners use products formulated for people when no suitable product specially formulated for animals is available. Out Of Focus _________________
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
Show Tags
27 Feb 2020, 09:00
1
This is a tricky question to me. I got it wrong by going with answer A, and after going through others' comments in this thread it seems important to reclarify how you bring your "real life" assumption to solve the question. I'll explain in details in answer A and C below
Stimuli: - premise: Veterinarians gets money by selling manufacturers' products. pet owner rarely throw away their mail. One manufacturer has quality products. - paradox: but when they offer free promotional materials, very few veterinarians accepted
Question: asking for an explanation
Answers A) I previously thought since most of Vs are already selling their products, taking promotional materials would not provide monetary incentives for them. However it could still boost the sales. So even though this might explain why they didn't accept the offer, the argument sound suspicious and weak B) since this is clearly stated as "supplement", it still provides monetary incentives. So didn't explain the paradox C) I didn't realize competition with pet stores and supermarkets should be relevant here nor should be assumed. But reading the answer more I noticed author used words such as "unlike" and "also", which kind of implies a competition might exist. A less weak answer than A D) this should strengthen the argument that most Vs should accept the offer E) products formulated for people is irrelevant
gmatclubot
Re: Veterinarians generally derive some of their income from selling sever
[#permalink]
27 Feb 2020, 09:00
close
53% (02:07) correct 
