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.
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
30 Oct 2018, 09:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
66% (01:42) correct
34%
(01:52)
wrong
based on 1390
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Drug company manager: Our newest product is just not selling. One way to save it would be a new marketing campaign. This would not guarantee success, but it is one chance to save the product, so we should try it.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the manager’s argument?
(A) The drug company has invested heavily in its newest product, and losses due to this product would be harmful to the company’s profits.
(B) Many new products fail whether or not they are supported by marketing campaigns.
(C) The drug company should not undertake a new marketing campaign for its newest product if the campaign has no chance to succeed.
(D) Undertaking a new marketing campaign would endanger the drug company’s overall position by necessitating cutbacks in existing marketing campaigns.
(E) Consumer demand for the drug company’s other products has been strong in the time since the company’s newest product was introduced.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the manager’s argument?
(A) The drug company has invested heavily in its newest product, and losses due to this product would be harmful to the company’s profits.
(B) Many new products fail whether or not they are supported by marketing campaigns.
(C) The drug company should not undertake a new marketing campaign for its newest product if the campaign has no chance to succeed.
(D) Undertaking a new marketing campaign would endanger the drug company’s overall position by necessitating cutbacks in existing marketing campaigns.
(E) Consumer demand for the drug company’s other products has been strong in the time since the company’s newest product was introduced.
31 Oct 2018, 12:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
HAPPYatHARVARD Be careful with that rule about extremes. It makes sense for Inference, but not for Strengthen/Weaken. If I am trying to weaken an argument, an extreme statement can be EXTREMELY helpful. However, noticing SHOULD is important. The appearance of that word in the conclusion is the key to this question.
The author states that a particular action may be helpful, and therefore concludes that the company SHOULD take that action. This relies on an assumption that there is no reason NOT to take that action. Any answer that gives us a compelling reason not to run a new marketing campaign for the product will be a winner. We don't need to definitively prove that the campaign will be bad--we just need to weaken the idea that it will be good.
C is understandably tempting, but it is a conditional with an unfulfilled condition. In other words, it says "If no chance, then don't do it." But we don't know there's no chance, so C has zero effect on the argument.
B doesn't add to our understanding, either. We already know that the product may fail with or without the campaign, so B doesn't change anything. (As for the word "many," we can interpret it the same way as "some": basically, more than zero and that's it! There's no clear threshold for what "many" means. It's very dependent on context and interpretation.)
D introduces a clear drawback to undertaking the campaign. This is the kind of new information we were looking for! Note that it doesn't PROVE the argument wrong. Maybe the campaign would be a smashing success, but it introduces a big risk for the whole company, and that's a pretty compelling reason to go against the author's conclusion. sony1000, we have a pretty wide-open mission here, because the conclusion just said "We should do this." If the conclusion had been more narrowly focused on a specific effect (e.g. "The campaign will increase awareness of this product by 20%"), then information about the overall effect on the company would be out of scope.
The author states that a particular action may be helpful, and therefore concludes that the company SHOULD take that action. This relies on an assumption that there is no reason NOT to take that action. Any answer that gives us a compelling reason not to run a new marketing campaign for the product will be a winner. We don't need to definitively prove that the campaign will be bad--we just need to weaken the idea that it will be good.
C is understandably tempting, but it is a conditional with an unfulfilled condition. In other words, it says "If no chance, then don't do it." But we don't know there's no chance, so C has zero effect on the argument.
B doesn't add to our understanding, either. We already know that the product may fail with or without the campaign, so B doesn't change anything. (As for the word "many," we can interpret it the same way as "some": basically, more than zero and that's it! There's no clear threshold for what "many" means. It's very dependent on context and interpretation.)
D introduces a clear drawback to undertaking the campaign. This is the kind of new information we were looking for! Note that it doesn't PROVE the argument wrong. Maybe the campaign would be a smashing success, but it introduces a big risk for the whole company, and that's a pretty compelling reason to go against the author's conclusion. sony1000, we have a pretty wide-open mission here, because the conclusion just said "We should do this." If the conclusion had been more narrowly focused on a specific effect (e.g. "The campaign will increase awareness of this product by 20%"), then information about the overall effect on the company would be out of scope.
General Discussion
30 Oct 2018, 10:50
Kudos
Bookmarks
Akela
Clean (D) If the proposed plan of action is doesn't guarantee expected return/results then Investment in that programme would be detrimental to the Interest of the COmpany , as such thr suggested course of action may not be adopted.
