Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable te

Question

Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable television channel, decreased last year. Meanwhile a neighboring town’s local channel, KOOP, shifted its focus to farming issues and reported an increase in advertising applications for the year. To increase applications for its advertisement spots, KMTV should focus its programming on farming issues as well.

Which of the following wekens the argument above?

A. The general nature of jobs available in Greentown differs slightly from that in the town where KOOP is based. 
B. KMTV has seen its advertising revenue fall for three consecutive years.
C. KOOP offers advertising spots at a particularly cheap rate when compared to similar channels’.
D. KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one.
E. KMTV and KOOP have been competitors since both started operation in 1992.

chetan2u · Accepted Answer

Hi,

The argument says that KMTV should follow the path of KOOP by switching over to the farming issues.
We have to weaken the argument. 
How can we do it..
  1. Some other reasons for this increase in KOOP and drop in KMTV.
2. Something that tells us that farming issues cannot be applied to KMTV

We can eliminate all except C and D as also seen in above posts.

For all those confused between C and D..
 Choice C tells us that the rates at KOOP are quite cheap when compared to others, so rates are also cheap when compared to KMTV  
  But that must be the case even earlier, but WHY did the increase happen in last two years.   . This choice does not hit the reason for the increase specific to last year. If we accept the choice C to be true, then the increase in the advertising applications for KOOP should have been high in years prior to last year.
So, eliminate C because it does not give us reason to believe that the cheaper rates are responsible for increase in LAST year's applications.

Now D talks of the two year in question - last year and present year.
Thus it gives us another reason for the decrease of KMTV's add applications.

D

Bunuel · Answer

Could you please name topics according to the rules? Check rule 3 here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/rules-for-po ... 33935.html Thank you.

Sanjeetgujrall · Answer

A is a general statement...just because jobs are different doesnt weaken the conclusion. Also it mentions the word "slighly"

C was a bit tricky but we need to weaken the conclusion about KMTV.

Thus D is the answer...because if they increase the cost it might not work

Posted from my mobile device

arorni · Answer

Hi,

Can someone please explain, why C is incorrect? We have to weaken the argument. As per argument, KOOP has shifted it's focus that resulted in an increase of the number of applications received so KMTC should also do the same. Anything that can prove that it's not the focus change but something else that has increased the number of applications will serve the purpose. C does exactly the same. Please correct me if I am wrong.

nguen · Answer

The question is Weaken the argument that KMTV will get more applications if it focuses on farming

The debate is between C and D

KOOP may be receiving more applications bc people care about farming and ad spots are cheap there. So if KMTV does farming programming but sells ads at 2X the competition it will still not get more applications.

Basically cost of advertising on KMTV is more important to KMTV applications than the effect of the cost of advertising on KOOP on KMTV applications

Posted from my mobile device

arorni · Answer

Got it..thanks

sayan640 · Answer

VeritasKarishma 
 mikemcgarry 
 GMATNinja 
Can you please explain why option C is not the answer ?

Posted from my mobile device

ArupRS · Answer

What if 2x rate is significantly less then other competitor's charge? InoptionC, it is clearlt mentioned KOOP's rate is much lower than other channels' rate. 
Please advise.

Regards,
Arup

Doer01 · Answer

Hi,
 Author’s conclusion is to increase applications for advert spots. How does D, KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one, weakens it? D rather presents the reason behind the said fall/reduction in advert spots.

Shouldn’t the correct answer choice affect the validity of the author’s conclusion, which is a plan in this case?

I don’t buy it.

Edit: Now that  chetan2u  has provided a thorough explanation, I understand it better and have also found gap in my reasoning. 
I do buy it now.

Posted from my mobile device

KarishmaB · Answer

Check chetan2u's explanation above. It's right on point. 
Let me know if there are any doubts.

sayan640 · Answer

Thanks  chetan2u

Sneha333 · Answer

I don't think D is the answer.

As the decrease was reported last year for KMTV.
Even if according to D: KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one.How this explains the decrease for last year.

arorni · Answer

In D are we talking about the duration i.e they have increased prices last year and that change is still applicable. If that is the case, then this sentence is so confusing or I would say badly written. Can you please confirm?

Posted from my mobile device

gmattodreamschool · Answer

PLEASE TELL ME WHY MY REASONING IS FLAWED . I OFTEN FIND MYSELF SELECTING THE WRONG OPTION BECAUSE I SOMEHOW HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT REASONING FOR THE WRONG OPTION

VeritasKarishma mikemcgarry GMATNinja My reasoning was as follows : conclusion : to increase the number of application to KMTV , it must focus its programming on farming issues as well Foundation of the argument: KOOP increased its applications by focusing on farming issues , thus KMTV would increase its applications by doing the same Pre thought options that would weaken the above argument: 1) any option that says focusing on farming issues may not INCREASE THE APPLICATIONS for KMTV 2) any option that says IT IS NOT FOCUS ON FARMING ISSUES THAT LEAD TO INCREASE IN APPLICATIONS FOR KOOP NOTE TO SELF: We are not concerned with what lead to the decrease in applications for KMTV but whether Focusing on farming issues would increase the applications or not A. The general nature of jobs available in Greentown differs slightly from that in the town where KOOP is based. -----> resounds with (1) B. KMTV has seen its advertising revenue fall for three consecutive years.-----> IRRELEVANT C. KOOP offers advertising spots at a particularly cheap rate when compared to similar channels’. -------> Even if that is the case then it does not mean that its the cheap rate that lead to increase in its applications and not farming issues . it could be one of the contributing factors but not the only one , as if it were the only one then focus on farming issues would not have lead to increase in applications D. KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one. ----------> as pointed earlier , we are not concerned with what led to the decrease in the applications but whether the focus in farming issues would increase the applications or not. It could be the reason for decrease in the number of applications to KMTV , but that does not mean focusing on agri issues will not increase the number of applications even marginally eg) the sales of candies of company A decreased after it increased the price of its candies company B in another country introduced candies of flavor X and increased its sales now can we say that if Company A introduced candies of flavor X in its country , it will not increase its sales?? no... we cant say that , if there were some people buying candies of Company A despite the increase of price there would certainly be people who buy candies of flavor X ---> this would increase sales UNLESS , PEOPLE OF COUNTRY A HATE FLAVOR X-----> again Resounds with (1) E. KMTV and KOOP have been competitors since both started operation in 1992.----> IRRELEVANT

XyLan · Answer

Hi  VeritasKarishma ,

Excerpt from the passage:  
  Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable television channel,  decreased   last year .  Meanwhile a neighboring town’s local channel, KOOP, shifted its focus to farming issues and reported an increase in advertising applications for the year. To increase applications for its advertisement spots, KMTV should focus its programming on farming issues as well.  
  Conclusion:  
 KMTV  should  adopt as KOOP did -----------> To increase applications for its advertisement spots.

Pre-Think:   
We have to  weaken  the argument.
Portray an  alternate reason  for the effect 
 OR  show that the reasoning  missed  something pertinent and attack that flaw.

If we plot the timelines, D actually goes  against  the logic-chain:
  Passage states:  Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable television channel,  decreased   last year 
Let's say, 
 Current year:  2019  
Last year:  2018  | Applications# = 500  - A drop in applications number from  2017  to  2018  (  AppsForAds on KMTV dropped last year in 2018  ) 
Last-to-last year:  2017  | Applications# = 800

Option D : KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one.
 Price in  2018  (last year):  50$  
Price in  2019  (current year):  100$  
The drop in applications had already happened in  2018  by the time the prices were made twice in  2019 .
 Timelines according to D:
 In  2018  The drop in applications  happened  ---------> In  2019 , the application prices were made twice. 
  
Then, How CAN the change in price, which occurred in the  relative future , affect/decide the past scenario?
It simply does  NOT  fit.
  
Would be great if you can provide some insight!

KarishmaB · Answer

Say we are at the beginning of 2019. The data is about last year i.e. 2018. From beginning to end of 2018, these are the changes seen:
- KMTV's advert spots decreased.
- KOOP shifted to farming issues and its advert applications increased.

Conclusion: To increase applications for its advertisement spots, KMTV should focus its programming on farming issues as well.

We need to weaken it.

A. The general nature of jobs available in Greentown differs slightly from that in the town where KOOP is based.

Doesn't say anything worthwhile. 
... general nature... differs slightly ..

B. KMTV has seen its advertising revenue fall for three consecutive years.

We are talking about advert spot applications, not advert revenues. Irrelevant.

C. KOOP offers advertising spots at a particularly cheap rate when compared to similar channels’.

KOOP spots are cheap. But what happened in the last year that increased its advert applications? Did they lower the rates last year? We don't know.

D. KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one.

This implies that over the course of last year, the price of advert spots has gone up leading to almost double figure now. 
"from last year to the current one" implies over the course of time. Else, this would have been "the new rates this year are almost double" etc. If you assume that the entire change was made this year, there is no other option that can be the answer.

E. KMTV and KOOP have been competitors since both started operation in 1992.

Irrelevant.

Answer (D)

udaypratapsingh99 · Answer

To increase applications for its advertisement spots, KMTV should focus its programming on farming issues as well.
 ((TO WEEKEN THIS ARGUMENT, OPTION MUST TELL US THAT IT IS NOT A BENEFICIAL IDEA TO focus its programming on farming issues. Or what will not improve it.))

Which of the following wekens the argument above?

A. The general nature of jobs available in Greentown differs slightly from that in the town where KOOP is based.  ((if neighboring town has access job related to FARMING ISSUES while Greentown do not, then it can be deduced that this excess job in its town might be the reason for Increase for KOOP, and same might not work for KMTV. So This might be correct or may be wrong if we get any better option. Let's keep this option on hold)) 
B. KMTV has seen its advertising revenue fall for three consecutive years. ((fall for 3 year doesm't say about what will not improve it.)) 
C. KOOP offers advertising spots at a particularly cheap rate when compared to similar channels’. ((Price war always plays role in market hold. If KOOP is offering better price for same price, it will attract more customers. So it is not necessary to have farming to do anything with this increase. THIS OPTION IS CORRECT.   NOTE: those who are posting D as correct, according to their logic also, C is better fit. ((perhaps, they have not read option D carefully. It is irrelevent))  )) 
D. KMTV has nearly doubled the price of advertising spots from last year to the current one. ((Increase is in this years price, not previous years(when applications decreased. So this option is irrelevent. This may tell that Doubling the price maybe a bad idea but do not relate with argument, that whether focus its programming on farming issues or not. THUS THIS OPTION IS CLEARLY WRONG.))) 
E. KMTV and KOOP have been competitors since both started operation in 1992. ((Irrelevent. Doesn't tell anything about what not to do or what to do ))

My choice,   C is correct. ,  A is runner up .

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.

Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable te

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

Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, Greentown’s local cable te

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