Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the pri

Question

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the price of a good results in an increase in the demand for this product, leading to higher sales. However, I believe that  the management’s strategy of stimulating the sales of our luxury cars by implementing a series of aggressive price reductions is seriously flawed.  Dramatic price reductions on our luxury cars will erode the image of exclusivity and premium quality associated with these vehicles.  If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.

Which of the following statements best describes the role of each portion in boldface in the argument above?

A. The first represents the main position of the corporate strategist; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that position.

B. The first is an assumption made by the corporate strategist about the efficacy of the management’s strategy; the second is evidence that supports the strategist’s reasoning.

C. The first is evidence supporting the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is that position.

D. The first is evidence supporting the position of the corporate strategist; the second is a generalization that will not hold in the case at issue.

E. The first is the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is evidence in support of that position.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The corporate strategist begins the argument by describing the usual relationship between the reduction in price and the resulting effect on product demand. After describing the traditional relationship, he concludes, however, that the management’s price-reduction strategy is flawed. Thus, the first statement in boldface represents the conclusion of the corporate strategist. Finally, the strategist finishes his argument by providing evidence that justifies his reasoning. Therefore, the second statement in boldface provides evidence that supports the main position of the corporate strategist.

(A) This answer choice correctly describes the first statement but incorrectly states that the second statement weighs against rather than supports the main position of the equity strategist.

(B) This answer choice incorrectly states that the first statement represents an assumption made by the strategist. Remember that assumptions are never stated in the body of the argument. The second statement is correctly described as evidence supporting the strategist’s reasoning.

(C) This answer choice incorrectly labels the first statement as evidence supporting the conclusion and the second statement as the conclusion itself. The order of the two descriptions should be the reverse of that presented in this answer choice.

(D) This answer choice incorrectly describes the first statement as evidence rather than the conclusion, and incorrectly states that the scenario outlined in the second statement will not hold in the case at issue.

(E) CORRECT.  This answer correctly describes the first statement as the strategist’s conclusion and the second statement as the evidence supporting that conclusion.

Hatakekakashi · Answer

strategy flawed - low prices makes car cheaper

so a,d,e out

between b/c

the strategist believes something and says something and the first bold face is not evidence

so (B)

natp7 · Answer

I chose (e)

The first boldface represents the main point of the argument made by the Corporate Strategists saying that low prices for a luxury good may not convert to better sales, it will further weaken the brand. The second boldface is his reasoning and premise for the conclusion.

For (b), I don't think assumptions are explicitly stated. So it can't be the first boldface.

winterschool · Answer

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the price of a good results in an increase in the demand for this product, leading to higher sales. However, I believe that the management’s strategy of stimulating the sales of our luxury cars by implementing a series of aggressive price reductions is seriously flawed. Dramatic price reductions on our luxury cars will erode the image of exclusivity and premium quality associated with these vehicles. If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.

Which of the following statements best describes the role of each portion in boldface in the argument above?

A. The first represents the main position of the corporate strategist; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that position.  Incorrect

second is not against first

B. The first is an assumption made by the corporate strategist about the efficacy of the management’s strategy; the second is evidence that supports the strategist’s reasoning.  Incorrect

first is not an assumption

C. The first is evidence supporting the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is that position.  Incorrect

second is not main position

D. The first is evidence supporting the position of the corporate strategist; the second is a generalization that will not hold in the case at issue.  Incorrect

second support first

E.  The first is the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is evidence in support of that position.   Correct

Hatakekakashi · Answer

I figured my mistake Assumptions aren't stated

kashishDhir · Answer

I am confused between B and E.
Strategist 'believed' that the management's ............
Hence, I chose B instead of E as he is assuming something.

Where is the flaw in my reasoning?

Thanks!

solvewithsourabh · Answer

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the price of a good results in an increase in the demand for this product, leading to higher sales. However, I believe that  the management’s strategy of stimulating the sales of our luxury cars by implementing a series of aggressive price reductions is seriously flawed. Dramatic price reductions on our luxury cars will erode the image of exclusivity and premium quality associated with these vehicles. If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.

Which of the following statements best describes the role of each portion in boldface in the argument above?

A. The first represents the main position of the corporate strategist; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that position.

B. The first is an assumption made by the corporate strategist about the efficacy of the management’s strategy; the second is evidence that supports the strategist’s reasoning.

C. The first is evidence supporting the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is that position.

D. The first is evidence supporting the position of the corporate strategist; the second is a generalization that will not hold in the case at issue.

E. The first is the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is evidence in support of that position.

hey Bunuel,
thanks for this beautiful question with even more beautiful and competent answer options.

so here's how i went about this one:
I eliminated A B D straight away ( well sorry for my earlier claim - competent ans options .. haha )

between B and E, (really competent ans choices)
2nd part of both options is all right. 
now the 1st BF is clearly an opinion/belief of the corporate strategist. and as you (and pretty much everyone who replied this post ) said an assumption is never explicitly stated in the argument rather it is always implicitly stated and So option B is clearly wrong in that it says 1st part of A is an assumption.

now I have made a generalized conclusion from the reasoning you provided to eliminate B.
- if you even come across a BF question in which any of the ans option says the 1st or 2nd BF is an assumption.... then eliminate that ans choice right away based on the logic that no assumptions can be the explicit part of the argument.

am right in drawing that conclusion?

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the pri

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

Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the pri

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