Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted

Question

Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted with Duratex carpet while the lobby of a nearby hotel was being carpeted with our competitor's most durable carpet. Today, after a decade in which the two hotels have had similar amounts of foot traffic through their lobbies, that other hotel is having to replace the worn-out carpeting near its lobby entrances, whereas the Cormond's Duratex carpeting has years of wear left in it.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the advertisement's evidence for concluding that Duratex carpet is more durable than the carpet of its competitor?

A. The lobby of the Cormond Hotel has five different entrances, but the lobby of the other hotel has only two.

B. The carpet of the Cormond Hotel's lobby is not the most durable carpet that Duratex manufactures.

C. The other hotel has a popular restaurant that can be reached from outside without walking through the hotel lobby.

D. The carpet that is being used to replace carpeting near the other hotel's lobby entrances is not Duratex carpet.

E. There is a third hotel near the other two that has not replaced the Duratex carpet in its lobby for more than 15 years.

dinesh86 · Accepted Answer

Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted with Duratex carpet while the lobby of a nearby hotel was being carpeted with our competitor's most durable carpet. Today, after a decade in which the two hotels have had similar amounts of foot traffic through their lobbies, that other hotel is having to replace the worn-out carpeting near its lobby entrances, whereas the Cormond's Duratex carpeting has years of wear left in it.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the advertisement's evidence for concluding that Duratex carpet is more durable than the carpet of its competitor?

A. The lobby of the Cormond Hotel has five different entrances, but the lobby of the other hotel has only two - Correct, more entrance means less footfall per entrance and hence less wear-tear.

B. The carpet of the Cormond Hotel's lobby is not the most durable carpet that Duratex manufactures - Irrelevant

C. The other hotel has a popular restaurant that can be reached from outside without walking through the hotel lobby - If this is the case it is further strengthening that other hotel's carpet is of poor quality.

D. The carpet that is being used to replace carpeting near the other hotel's lobby entrances is not Duratex carpet - Irrelevant as we do not bother about replacing of carpet after wearing.

E. There is a third hotel near the other two that has not replaced the Duratex carpet in its lobby for more than 15 years - OFS.

Kudos please....

intheend14 · Answer

For me this is definitely A. A shows that although there's similar foot-traffic in the lobbies, there's different amounts of traffic in the entrances and provides an explanation as to why. Obviously, if there are the same amount of people walking on fewer paths, those fewer paths will show more wear.

B would strengthen the argument.

I feel C would also strengthen. D and E are irrelevant.

B would strengthen the argument.

I feel C would also strengthen. D and E are irrelevant.

RITESH24 · Answer

Its clearly mentioned that both the hotels have had same no of foot traffic then how can we use option -A which indicates that due to different entrance there was less wear -tear in one and not other ... please explain!

nehaaD · Answer

Today, after a decade in which the two hotels have had similar amounts of foot traffic through their lobbies

A. The lobby of the Cormond Hotel has five different entrances, but the lobby of the other hotel has only two - Correct, more entrance means less footfall per entrance and hence less wear-tear.

Let's say both the hotels have 100 foot traffic each.
Option A states that Cormond Hotel has five different entrances, which means that the no of footsteps on the carpet will be distributed to these 5 entrances( avg=20    footstep on each of the carpet per entrance) whereas the lobby of other hotel has two entrance only, which means that more no. of footsteps will be distributed to these 2 entrances only ( avg=50    footstep on each of the carpet per entrance). 
More footstep on each carpet per entrance, therefore more wear tear.

IloveMBA123 · Answer

i dont understand the logic too. "have had similar amount of food traffic through their lobbies" How would you know where they walk? You are assuming the foot traffic are equally distributed to the carpet that near the entrance, then how about the carpet after the entrance? like check in counter?

Sometime i find the question completely illogical and irrelevant, and it might not applicable to what other ppl see and touch everyday

Nina1987 · Answer

The passage clearly mentions "Today, after a decade in which the two hotels have had similar amounts of foot traffic through their lobbies". So how does it matter from how many entrances guests come in, cuz when they enter there will be same number of feet on the carpet?

can u pls help? 
  GMATNinja ,  ThatDudeKnows ,  GMATNinjaTwo ,  IanStewart ,  MartyTargetTestPrep ,  RonPurewal ,  KarishmaB ,  MarkSullivan ,  AjiteshArun ,  EMPOWERgmatRichC ,  mikemcgarry ,  DmitryFarber ,  sayantanc2k ,  TommyWallach

IanStewart · Answer

It's important to note, in the wording of the question, that it's the carpet around the entrances that needs to be replaced (the "other hotel is having to replace the worn-out carpeting near its lobby entrances"). If a hotel has only one entrance, then every guest will walk on the carpet at that entrance. If another hotel has 1,000,000 entrances, each used equally often, then almost zero guests will walk on the carpet at each entrance. You'd expect the carpet around each entrance at this second hotel to last roughly 1,000,000 times longer than the carpet at the first hotel. Answer A says the same thing with less extreme numbers.

KarishmaB · Answer

The argument is talking only about worn out carpeting near the entrances. Think of them as separate small pieces of carpet. 
The situation would be parallel to this:
Case 1: In year 1, you have 2 new shirts and you have to dress up everyday in one of those.
Case 2: In year 2, you have 5 new shirts and you have to dress up everyday in one of those.

We can reasonably expect that the 5 shirts will have a lot more wear left in them at the end of year 2 even if all 7 shirts are of the same quality.

aadityat · Answer

don't you all think that the first one strengthens the question? we are given that the lobby of the other hotel has worn out faster than the lobby of the c hotel and we are picking the 1st option. why? 1st option strengthens the fact that the other hotel has 2 entrances and hence wears out faster then the c hotel which has 5 entrances. let me know.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Advertisement: Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia