Department store manager: There is absolutely no reason to offer our c

Question

Department store manager: There is absolutely no reason to offer our customers free gift wrapping again this holiday season. If most customers take the offer, it will be expensive and time-consuming for us. On the other hand, if only a few customers want it, there is no advantage in offering it.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the department store manager’s argument?

(A) Gift wrapping would cost the store more during this holiday season than in previous holiday seasons.

(B) Anything that slows down shoppers during the holiday season costs the store money.

(C) It would be to the store’s advantage to charge customers for gift wrapping services.

(D) It would be expensive to inform customers about the free gift wrapping service.

(E) Either few customers would want free gift wrapping or most customers would want it.

100mitra · Answer

Pharaphazing :
 Department store manager: 
  Argument  : There is absolutely no reason to offer our customers free gift wrapping again this holiday season. 
  Assumption  : 
-  If  most customers  take the offer , it will be expensive and time-consuming for us.
On the other hand, 
-  if only a  few customers  want it , there is no advantage in offering it.

assumption required  by the department store  manager’s argument

Correct Option E 
 Either   few customers  would want free gift wrapping 
 or   most customers  would want it.

SaiPavanR · Answer

Conclusion -> No point in having the free gift wrappings(FGW) this holiday season
Logic -> If n(number of customers) is more, then cost is high and time consumed is high
 if n is less, then disadvantage with FGW

Assumption -> Assumption should bridge the gap between logic and conclusion (or) State the unstated logic (or) establish that no external factors are hurting our logic.

A doesn't meet any of the above requirements. It is plainly comparing the expenses of the previous year with those of current year.

B is a half baked option. Stating only one part of the logic

C - irrelevant

D - If the store informs more customers about it, then more customer come to the store. Not a relevant assumption and not connecting the logic and conclusion

E - Bridges the gap, stating that either more customers or less customers will come to the store, making the conclusion true always
 
Let me know if I am wrong in my explanation. I am happy to hear and learn.

unraveled · Answer

Department store manager: There is absolutely no reason to offer our customers free gift wrapping again this holiday season. If  most customers  take the offer, it will be  expensive  and  time-consuming  for us. On the other hand, if  only a few customers  want it, there is no advantage in offering it.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the department store manager’s argument?

Two pillars that support the argument are 'expensive' and 'time-consuming'. Also, other factor is either of clients who may want wrapping or not - few or almost all. Anything that touches upon the two pillars, eventually supporting the argument, must be the assumption.

(A) Gift wrapping would cost the store more during this holiday season than in previous holiday seasons. - WRONG. Only cost part is taken care of. Nothing about time.

(B) Anything that slows down shoppers during the holiday season costs the store money. - WRONG. Similar to A, this one only takes care of time aspect.

(C) It would be to the store’s advantage to charge customers for gift wrapping services. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(D) It would be expensive to inform customers about the free gift wrapping service. - WRONG. Again only cost aspect. But it's more of irrelevant.

(E)  Either few customers  would want free gift wrapping or  most customers  would want it. - CORRECT.

Answer E.

Bunuel · Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

I’m immediately pissed off when the department store manager says there is “absolutely no reason” to offer free gift wrapping. Seriously dude?  Absolutely no reason?!  Do you know how hard it is to prove that? Okay dumbass, let’s hear your evidence: “ If  most customers take the offer, it will be expensive/time-consuming,” and “ If  a few customers want the offer, there is no advantage in offering it.”

Yeah, that’s about as **** as I was expecting it to be. The store manager is trying to support a very bold conclusion with two super-shaky premises. The first premise is just worthless. Just because something is “expensive and time-consuming” doesn’t mean there is no reason to do it. Curing cancer, anyone? Expensive, time-consuming, and  worth it . Furthermore, we don’t know that “most customers” are going to take the offer, so this premise might not even apply.

The second premise is slightly more reasonable, because it at least says there is no advantage to the program under certain circumstances. The same flaw is present here, however, because we don’t know that “only a few” customers will take the offer, so it might not apply either.

So the manager has two premises, neither of which might even apply. We’re asked to find a necessary assumption of the manager’s argument. This means “pick the answer that must be true in order for the argument to survive.” Another way of thinking about this is “pick the answer that, if untrue, causes the argument to fail.”

A) No, this doesn’t have to be true in order for the argument to make sense. Maybe gift wrapping is really expensive every year. It could even be a little cheaper this year than last year, but still be really expensive. If this answer is untrue, the store manager’s argument could still possibly make sense. So this isn’t necessary.

B) What? No, I don't think this is a missing component of the department store manager's argument. Cash registers slow down shoppers, but cash registers definitely don’t cost the store money. This is absurd. It’s way too broad to be a “necessary” component of the argument. It proves too much.

C) This might strengthen the manager’s argument, but it isn’t necessary. Maybe the store manager would prefer not to offer any gift-wrapping at all, regardless of who is paying.

D) What? How is “informing the customers” even relevant? I suppose this answer might strengthen the store manager’s argument, but it certainly isn’t required.

E) Yep. The store manager’s first premise only even applied if “most customers” took the deal. And the store manager’s second premise only applied if “few customers” took the deal. Those were the store manager’s only two premises! So if more than a few, but less than most, customers take the deal, (say… 30 percent?) then the store manager  has no argument whatsoever . Therefore it is necessary, in order for the argument to make any sense at all, that either “most” or “only a few” customers will take the deal.

E is our answer.

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.

Department store manager: There is absolutely no reason to offer our c

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

Department store manager: There is absolutely no reason to offer our c

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