Asset protection manager: This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal

Question

Asset protection manager:  This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal year, we’ve managed to reduce the number of in-store thefts by more than 20% of the previous year’s figure, evidence that our store continues to profit from our vigilance against shoplifting.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the asset protection manager’s argument?

(A) Six years ago the store had the highest number of thefts of any store in the region.

(B) The store’s gross sales dropped by nearly 8% from the previous year’s figure.

(C) By utilizing motion-controlled cameras and digital imaging software, similar stores have reduced theft by more than 50% over the same time period.

(D) As the store’s clientele has become more affluent, the dollar value of items reported stolen has more than doubled over the last five years.

(E) Punishments for shoplifters in the city in which the store is located have been steadily becoming more lenient over the last five years

Nevernevergiveup · Accepted Answer

B is a trap it strengthens instead of weakening it.  Even I have chosen it only to realize later.

Asset protection manager:  This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal year, we’ve managed to reduce the number of in-store thefts by more than 20% of the previous year’s figure, evidence that our store continues to profit from our vigilance against shoplifting.

Which of the following, if true, would most  weaken  the asset protection manager’s argument?

(A) Six years ago the store had the highest number of thefts of any store in the region.
 This explains the past scenario and does not affect the conclusion. 
(B) The store’s gross sales dropped by nearly 8% from the previous year’s figure.
 (this explains only one year sales reduction(Some loss) and since there is a theft reduction(Gain) from past five years, store may either profit or stay atleast in no loss situation. This supports the conclusion. Opposite) 
(C) By utilizing motion-controlled cameras and digital imaging software, similar stores have reduced theft by more than 50% over the same time period.
 (Similar store performance does not affect the our store conclusion. OFS) 
(D) As the store’s clientele has become more affluent, the dollar value of items reported stolen has more than doubled over the last five years.
 (If the dollar value of items gets higher even if the number of crimes decreases loss can be huge. This weakens the conclusion which says vigilance resulted in profits due to crime reduction.) 
(E) Punishments for shoplifters in the city in which the store is located have been steadily becoming more lenient over the last five years
 (Punishments are more lenient then that does not deter the criminals. This fact can support if not weaken the conclusion that store is still experiencing reduction in thefts in-spite of this leniency factor i.e., the store is profiting before of this vigilance.)

KarishmaB · Answer

Premises:
For 5th year in a row, there is a reduction in number of thefts by more than 20%

Conclusion: 
So our store is profiting from our vigilance against shoplifting

The point being made by the manager is that since number of thefts is continuously reducing, vigilance is proving profitable. Vigilance would involve some expense but the reducing number of thefts is justifying the expense. 
We need to weaken this. So we need to say why even with the reduction in the number of thefts, the store may not profit from vigilance.

(A) Six years ago the store had the highest number of thefts of any store in the region.
If the number of thefts was high 6 yrs ago, the reduction in the number of thefts must be substantial. So it seems more likely that vigilance is profitable. Does not weaken.

(B) The store’s gross sales dropped by nearly 8% from the previous year’s figure.
Gross Sales figures have nothing to do with this question. We need to consider profit from vigilance only. So the cost of vigilance vs the savings in theft loss is our sole focus.

(C) By utilizing motion-controlled cameras and digital imaging software, similar stores have reduced theft by more than 50% over the same time period.
What profits other stores are seeing through vigilance is not our concern.

(D) As the store’s clientele has become more affluent, the dollar value of items reported stolen has more than doubled over the last five years.
If 5 years back, items worth $100 were being stolen, today items worth $200 are being stolen. So even though the number of thefts may have reduced, dollar value of the thefts still happening have doubled. Hence this seriously puts into question the profit from vigilance.

(E) Punishments for shoplifters in the city in which the store is located have been steadily becoming more lenient over the last five years
Out of scope. We need to worry only about vigilance and thefts.

Answer (D)

vinnisatija · Answer

Can someone explain the difference between B and D ?

souvik101990 · Answer

Veritas Official OE

The correct answer choice begins with a phrase that looks out of scope – why should it matter that the store’s clientele has become more affluent? We’re talking about shoplifting, not about the socioeconomic status of the surrounding community. But wait – that lead-in gets to the point after the comma: the affluent clientele have led the store to stock higher-priced items, meaning that while the number of thefts has gone down the dollar value of those thefts has still risen. That directly weakens the conclusion that the store is profiting from the decrease in thefts.
The correct answer is (D).
So much like the 911 dispatcher this week could have written off Mr. Ramsey’s call as “why do I care about McDonald’s… click,” the patience to let the answer choice finish even if it takes its sweet time getting there will help you make productive decisions on test day. As you learn to Think Like the Testmaker to better avoid Critical Reasoning traps and pitfalls, you may want to think like Charles Ramsey.

kitipriyanka · Answer

Asset protection manager: This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal year, we’ve managed to reduce the number of in-store thefts by more than 20% of the previous year’s figure, evidence that our store continues to profit from our vigilance against shoplifting

APM claims that vigilance against shoplifting has helped in making profits.
Now,Based on Pre-thinking: APM nowhere claims that vigilance against shoplifting have completely stopped shoplifting. Now what if the items being shoplifted are costlier. In that case APM's claim would be weakened.
This is exactly what choice D offers.
Hence D

Jerrymaguire · Answer

I chose B instead of D. Can the experts take a look at my logic?

The whole conclusion is stating that the increased vigilance was a net "profit" or net gain vs. it was not a net "profit" or a net gain.

The answer choice of D states that the store's clientele has become more affluent. We also know that in-store thefts have gone down by 20%. Then logically, isn't it possible that the increased vigilance has decreased the thefts that would have been more "pricy"? In the counterfactual scenario, if there was no increased vigilance and the store's clientele is more affluent, each theft is more significant. It's fair to assume that the more pricy thefts would not have gone down as much or if at all without the increased vigilance. Thus, it is still a net gain that increased vigilance lowered theft by 20% even though the store's clientele has become more affluent vs the counterfactual in which there is no increase vigilance, so no lower theft and higher losses in terms of thefts from the more affluent store's clientele.

However in B, we can weaken the argument by stating that the thefts have not necessarily decreased from the increased vigilance but instead from the decrease in sales. Less sales could mean less people are shopping at the store. Hence, less opportunities for thefts.

I thought of this question as a 700 level question instead of a 600-700 level, but still I think the question is flawed.

Asset protection manager: This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal

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

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Asset protection manager: This year, for the fifth consecutive fiscal

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

My Rewards