In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started

Question

In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started propping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Moviemania is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Moviemania’s own sales figures, Moviemania sold 5 percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Moviemania’s claim?

(A) Total sales of all refreshments at Moviemania’s movie theaters increased by less than 5 percent last year.

(B) Moviemania makes more money on food and beverages sold at its theaters than it does on sales of movie tickets.

(C) Moviemania’s customers prefer the taste of popcorn popped in coconut oil to that of popcorn popped in canola oil.

(D) Total attendance at Moviemania’s movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before.

(E) The year before last, Moviemania experienced a 10 percent increase in popcorn sales over the previous year.

mikemcgarry · Accepted Answer

Dear Rakesh First of all, I don't think this is a particularly well-written question. It says ".... started propping its popcorn in canola oil ," --- do they mean " popping "? " preparing "? That problem aside, it's a tricky question because there are two different voices --- Moviemania, and the critic of Moviemania. Here's the argument (1) Background facts: " In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started preparing its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Moviemania is planning to switch back ." (Everyone agrees about these.) (2) MOVIEMANIA: We are switching back to canola oil because ] the change has hurt popcorn sale s. (3) Critic: That claim (#2) is false, however, since according to Moviemania’s own sales figures, Moviemania sold 5 percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year . Then the question says, " Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument (#3) against Moviemania’s claim (#2)? So, we want something that will weaken Moviemania's argument, and strengthen the argument of the critic. (A) Total sales of all refreshments at Moviemania’s movie theaters increased by less than 5 percent last year. If the other refreshments increased by less than 5%, but popcorn increase 5%, then popcorn outperformed the other refreshments. This means, popcorn sales were not hurt, relative to other refreshments. This weakens Moviemania's position, and strengthens' the critic, so this is the correct answer. (B) is irrelevant (C) & (D) & (E) all strengthen Moviemania's position, in one way or another, so these do the opposite of what the question asks. Does this make sense? Mike :-)

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Rakesh , D. Total attendance at Moviemania’s movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before . Well, if total attendance rose by 20%, and popcorn sales rose by only 5%, that means popcorn sales per capita fell. Let's say in the first year, 1000 people attended Moviemania, and bought 500 servings of popcorn --- the popcorn sales per person would be 500/1000 = 0.5. We could say ---- 50% of folks in attendance bought popcorn Now, let's say attendance increased by 20% to 1200, and popcorn sales increased by 5%, to 525. Now, the popcorn sales per person would be 525/1200 = 0.4375 --- now, only 43.75% of those in attendance bought popcorn. That would mean, Moviemania would be completely justified in saying ---- popcorn sales declined, because even thought the net amount sold is up, the percentage is down --- popcorn is less popular among the attendees than it had been in the previous year. Be very careful --- (D) strengthens Moviemania's position, but we want an answer that will strengthen the critic of Moviemania and weaken Moviemania's position. Thus, (D) does the exact opposite of what we want. Does this make sense? Mike :-)

Raffie · Answer

It has to be A.

A. Total sales of all refreshments at Moviemania’s movie theaters increased by less than 5 percent last year. 
 This is the only one that can be used to support the argument against Moviemania's claim 
B. Moviemania makes more money on food and beverages sold at its theaters than it does on sales of movie tickets. 
 Irrelevant 
C. Moviemania’s customers prefer the taste of popcorn popped in coconut oil to that of popcorn popped in canola oil. 
 Irrelevant 
D. Total attendance at Moviemania’s movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before. 
 This supports the claim - the increase in sales is lower than increase in attendance 
E. The year before last, Moviemania experienced a 10 percent increase in popcorn sales over the previous year.
 This supports the claim -

noboru · Answer

I went with A by POE, but I cannot justify it at all.
More thoughts, please

SudiptoGmat · Answer

IMO C. A talks about all the refreshments. Sales for other products may go down but pop corn has a rise in sales. C says sales is not the reason why company is switching back to coconut oil.

mainhoon · Answer

so then what is the OA? I don't see any point in discussing without the original poster posting the OA

ankit0411 · Answer

The OA to the above question is D.

Thanks,
Ankit

thienbinh · Answer

Don't post the OA if u are not sure about it :evil:

IMO the answer is A. While sale of all other refreshments increased by less than 5%, only popcorn sale increased by more than 5%. This fact suggests popcorn part performed very well --> supports the argument against Moviemania’s claim (or weaken Moviemania's view) And according to this post the OA is A in-january-of-last-year-the-moviemania-chain-of-movie-59884.html?fl=similar

ankit0411 · Answer

Well ! I am cent percent sure about the OA . "IMO" doesn't matter as I've experienced this question on the GMAT prep and questioning official answers is a waste of your time.

Lets learn from the official answers rather than questioning them .

Posted from my mobile device

Vineetk · Answer

OA is A not D. Please go through below link in case you still have any doubt.

catennacio · Answer

One more for A. D is irrelevant as it talks about attendance. In order for D to be correct, we need to know the spending power of the attendance on each type of toppings.

TGC · Answer

In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started propping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of the less healthful coconut oil that it had been using until then. Now Moviemania is planning to switch back, saying that the change has hurt popcorn sales. That claim is false, however, since according to Moviemania’s own sales figures, Moviemania sold 5 percent more popcorn last year than in the previous year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument against Moviemania’s claim?

A. Total sales of all refreshments at Moviemania’s movie theaters increased by less than 5 percent last year.
  Argument is not related to all refreshments and we cannot deduce increase in popcorn sales from this option. 
B. Moviemania makes more money on food and beverages sold at its theaters than it does on sales of movie tickets.
   Nowhere related to argument which deals with popcorn sales 
C. Moviemania’s customers prefer the taste of popcorn popped in coconut oil to that of popcorn popped in canola oil.
   If that would be the case why the sales after switching from coconut to canola would have increased. 
D. Total attendance at Moviemania’s movie theaters was more than 20 percent higher last year than the year before. 
  Contender,if people increased then we might have a chance of increased popcorn sales after switching the oil. 
E. The year before last, Moviemania experienced a 10 percent increase in popcorn sales over the previous year.
   Argument has no interest in the year before last.

1:59 it is

Aristocrat · Answer

In 'A'

If total refreshment have increased then what percentage of popcorn sales constitute in these total sales.
These is not mentioned in the option may be 5% increase will be still lesser in the overall percentage of refreshment.

Vineetk · Answer

D cannot be the answer as it weakens the argument. If the attendance increased by more than 20% and sales of popcorn increased by just over 5% then it create doubt of loss of potential sale. Thus, weakening the conclusion that moviemania reasoning is false.

Lets look at option A. If the total sales increased by lesser percentage than the sale of popcorn then it shows the performance of corn was good. Thus, strengthening the conclusion.

Hope this helps.

TGC · Answer

Well I would like to counter that

"by less than 5 percent last year. "

It could be 1% 2% 3% 4% anything

Moreover,Consider the below case:

Jan2011 Jan 2012
With Coconut - Sales -100 With Canola - 105
Total - 200 Toal - 202 (1% Increase)

How would you like to justify an increase in total sales by 2 with sales increase of popcorn by 5.

Plz Advice !!

Amit1408GMAThunk · Answer

Well Ankit0411, please understand and learn to reason the options or the answer choices.

The OA for this question is clearly an A and not D. I have seen this question in the GMATprep as well and the correct answer is A.

And the correct reasoning for the answer is as follows:-

Option A:- Lets say the theatre in all sells 10 products including the popcorns and other refreshments.

In those, the option A states that ' Total sales of all refreshments at Moviemania’s movie theaters increased by less than 5 percent last year.'

If I say that out of all the 10 products sold by the theatre, popcorn dipped or made in canola oil was having the maximum sales % increase, then the argument gets weakened as we want.

Practical example:- If I say that Reliance has so many businesses and if a particular Reliance Industries has given more growth than any other business line, then genuinely there is growth right.

With Option D:- No. of people attending the mall is not sufficient to answer the question whether they had the popcorn or no. If you go to the mall, do you confirm have the popcorn.

Another thing, GMAT is not about the only the right answer. It is about why the right answer is right and why the wrong answer choices are wrong.

If you learn to reason, then you can ace the GMAT>

Hope this helps.

grakesh · Answer

As in option D, due to 20% more attendance, 5% increase in pop corn sales is very reasonable. So this is also strengthening the argument. So why can't we go for this option ?

grakesh · Answer

Yes. It is making sense now. Thanks for the explaination.

IvyLeague56 · Answer

(A) it is :D thanks mike for the explaination

In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started

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