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 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.
16 Jan 2019, 08:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
64% (01:48) correct
36%
(01:55)
wrong
based on 771
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A large company has been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices. The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior. Still, the trial was worthwhile, since it provided useful information about the company’s practices. After all, this information has emboldened the company’s direct competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior toward customers and competitors.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?
(A) Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior.
(B) The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior.
(C) The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior.
(D) The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile.
(E) The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?
(A) Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior.
(B) The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior.
(C) The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior.
(D) The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile.
(E) The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger.
KanishkM
Joined: 09 Mar 2018
Last visit: 18 Dec 2021
Posts: 755
Given Kudos: 123
Location: India
Schools: DeGroote'21 Desautels '21 NUS '21
16 Jan 2019, 22:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
Akela
So if we break the above argument in pieces, we realize the inline
1) Large company is convicted of ill practices.
2) They will still continue with those practices.
3) Conviction was worthwhile, as it provided people with valuable insights.
(A) Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior.
This doesn't sum up the intent of the argument.
(B) The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior.
Lets keep this one on hold for now(Since we had read the same lines in the argument)
(C) The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior.
This is not the main idea.(just part of the argument)
(D) The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile.
This one does sum up the whole argument .
(E) The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger.
Irrelevant
Lets go back to B
The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior.
Isnt this part too extreme, that is contradicting one of the premises.
Answer D
21 Jan 2019, 22:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
A large company has been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices. The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior. Still, the trial was worthwhile, since it provided useful information about the company’s practices. After all, this information has emboldened the company’s direct competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior toward customers and competitors.
Boil it down-
A large company has been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices-> Background information. There has been a conviction.
The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior-> Opposing point. Do not expect the conviction to change behavior.
Still, the trial was worthwhile, since it provided useful information about the company’s practices. ->Turnaround word "still" which, when following an opposing point, almost always introduces evidence or the conclusion. We get another indicator word, "since," which tells us that what follows it is offered in support of what came before it. That makes the first part of this line a conclusion and the second part evidence.
After all, this information has emboldened the company’s direct competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior toward customers and competitors.-> "After all" indicates a continuation, and since what came before it is a premise, we know this line to be a premise as well, making the first part of line 3 the main conclusion.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?
(A) Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior. - Incorrect
(B) The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior. -incorrect; supports the main conclusion
(C) The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior. - Incorrect
(D) The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile. - Correct
(E) The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger. - Out of scope
Answer D
Boil it down-
A large company has been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices-> Background information. There has been a conviction.
The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior-> Opposing point. Do not expect the conviction to change behavior.
Still, the trial was worthwhile, since it provided useful information about the company’s practices. ->Turnaround word "still" which, when following an opposing point, almost always introduces evidence or the conclusion. We get another indicator word, "since," which tells us that what follows it is offered in support of what came before it. That makes the first part of this line a conclusion and the second part evidence.
After all, this information has emboldened the company’s direct competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior toward customers and competitors.-> "After all" indicates a continuation, and since what came before it is a premise, we know this line to be a premise as well, making the first part of line 3 the main conclusion.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?
(A) Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior. - Incorrect
(B) The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior. -incorrect; supports the main conclusion
(C) The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior. - Incorrect
(D) The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile. - Correct
(E) The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger. - Out of scope
Answer D
