GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 17 Feb 2019, 12:07

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in February
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
272829303112
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272812
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Algebra Webinar

February 17, 2019

February 17, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Attend this Free Algebra Webinar and learn how to master Inequalities and Absolute Value problems on GMAT.
• ### Valentine's day SALE is on! 25% off.

February 18, 2019

February 18, 2019

10:00 PM PST

11:00 PM PST

We don’t care what your relationship status this year - we love you just the way you are. AND we want you to crush the GMAT!

# Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4351
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2015, 23:03
3
13
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

55% (01:38) correct 45% (01:44) wrong based on 696 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

This question is part of the GMAT Club Critical Reasoning: "Weaken an argument" revision Project.

Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods, and banks have issued fewer mortgages. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously. Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.

_________________
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8882
Location: Pune, India
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2015, 20:58
4
1
souvik101990 wrote:
This question is part of the GMAT Club Critical Reasoning: "Weaken an argument" revision Project.

Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods, and banks have issued fewer mortgages. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously. Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.

There are some problems in this question but nevertheless answer is (A).

Premises:

Contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods,
Banks have issued fewer mortgages.
(So fewer homes are getting constructed and bought)

Conclusion: There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously.

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.
Many previously built housing units which were on hold have flooded the market leading to oversupply. Hence, it explain that developers and contractors are out of work. But it doesn't address the banks issuing fewer mortgages. With the banks in the picture, the argument shows us that fewer people are buying houses. The conclusion is that fewer new people are coming to city X. There could have been a much better weakener which explains that people are not buying houses because of the reduced rents or something similar. But this does go on to explain a part of the situation (fewer homes are getting constructed) so in case there is no other better option, we will go with this.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.
Size of the homes is out of scope. We are only concerned about the number of homes.

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.
You might think that this explains why developers and contractors are out of work since new people could be buying old houses but people who are selling their houses would need new houses in this case. Hence it does not explain developers, contractors and bankers out of work. It doesn't weaken our conclusion much except if most people had multiple homes and are selling out of those. In that case, it would be similar to option (A) where it would explain fewer new constructions. But expecting most people to have multiple homes is too much of an assumption. So option (A) is better.

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.
This should encourage more construction, not less. Hence, not relevant.

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.
Out of scope. Perhaps people have started buying more automobiles and boats, we don't know. The relation between homes and other big ticket items is not known.

_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

##### General Discussion
Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2015
Posts: 46
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2015, 06:57
IMO - A
Stopping of developments and fewer bank mortgages = less number of new residents
so we must find an evidence which gives an alternate explanation for the situation and i think (A) does that .
_________________

Kudos if it helped you in any way

Retired Moderator
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Posts: 487
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 May 2017, 04:03
Hello VeritasPrepKarishma,

Thank you for the explanation. Though I chose A (since it seemed more refined than C), I am still not convinced with explanation to discard C.

My reasoning was C talks about past 6 months and the stem talks about "recently". We don't know recent this "recently" could be. It could be past 2 months with C being true in that time frame.

A plays it safe and does not mention any time reference.

any thoughts? GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8882
Location: Pune, India
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 May 2017, 06:02
warriorguy wrote:
Hello VeritasPrepKarishma,

Thank you for the explanation. Though I chose A (since it seemed more refined than C), I am still not convinced with explanation to discard C.

My reasoning was C talks about past 6 months and the stem talks about "recently". We don't know recent this "recently" could be. It could be past 2 months with C being true in that time frame.

A plays it safe and does not mention any time reference.

any thoughts? GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo?

I wouldn't use that logic. The argument uses the word "recently". Option (A) uses "this year" and option (C) uses "6 months". We don't know what recently means so both could be assumed to be recent.

The problem with (C) is that it doesn't make sense with the argument. The conclusion is derived based on certain conditions of today. A weakener would give an alternative to the conclusion which would explain the conditions and hence reduce the probability of the conclusion being true.

Option (A) explains the situation faced by contractors and developers, but it doesn't explain why banks are issuing fewer mortgages.
Option (C) doesn't explain the situation faced by all - contractors, developers and bankers. If resale increases, people who are selling their house would need to buy a new house hence the contractors and developers should not be out of work. Also, whenever buying happens - new house or old - mortgages will be issued.

Hence (C) will not be the answer.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Intern
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 15
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jun 2017, 16:57
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:
This question is part of the GMAT Club Critical Reasoning: "Weaken an argument" revision Project.

Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods, and banks have issued fewer mortgages. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously. Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.

There are some problems in this question but nevertheless answer is (A).

Premises:

Contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods,
Banks have issued fewer mortgages.
(So fewer homes are getting constructed and bought)

Conclusion: There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously.

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.
Many previously built housing units which were on hold have flooded the market leading to oversupply. Hence, it explain that developers and contractors are out of work. But it doesn't address the banks issuing fewer mortgages. With the banks in the picture, the argument shows us that fewer people are buying houses. The conclusion is that fewer new people are coming to city X. There could have been a much better weakener which explains that people are not buying houses because of the reduced rents or something similar. But this does go on to explain a part of the situation (fewer homes are getting constructed) so in case there is no other better option, we will go with this.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.
Size of the homes is out of scope. We are only concerned about the number of homes.

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months.
You might think that this explains why developers and contractors are out of work since new people could be buying old houses but people who are selling their houses would need new houses in this case. Hence it does not explain developers, contractors and bankers out of work. It doesn't weaken our conclusion much except if most people had multiple homes and are selling out of those. In that case, it would be similar to option (A) where it would explain fewer new constructions. But expecting most people to have multiple homes is too much of an assumption. So option (A) is better.

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.
This should encourage more construction, not less. Hence, not relevant.

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year.
Out of scope. Perhaps people have started buying more automobiles and boats, we don't know. The relation between homes and other big ticket items is not known.

Please correct me if my logic is wrong, but the conclusion is "There must be fewer new residents moving to City X", and I think C does better job than other to weaken the conclusion (even there is a weakness in it). It doesn't matter if the ones who sold their old houses need new house or not or not, there are still many NEW RESIDENTs come to city X as they bought these old houses (The weakness of this Ans is of course there is possibility that the current residents bought those houses. But, we can not deny the high possibility that many NEW RESIDENTS bought those house and then the NEW RESIDENTS of city X increase→ weaken the conclusion)

The option A says " This year several housing blocks have gone on the market ", but does it mean that many houses were bought?? No right? Those houses were just released on the market "after being held up for months by legal red tape". Then how can we say that the are more NEW RESIDENTS come to city X, as we do not know that those house were purchased or not?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8882
Location: Pune, India
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2017, 00:41
Labmalo wrote:
Please correct me if my logic is wrong, but the conclusion is "There must be fewer new residents moving to City X", and I think C does better job than other to weaken the conclusion (even there is a weakness in it). It doesn't matter if the ones who sold their old houses need new house or not or not, there are still many NEW RESIDENTs come to city X as they bought these old houses (The weakness of this Ans is of course there is possibility that the current residents bought those houses. But, we can not deny the high possibility that many NEW RESIDENTS bought those house and then the NEW RESIDENTS of city X increase→ weaken the conclusion)

The option A says " This year several housing blocks have gone on the market ", but does it mean that many houses were bought?? No right? Those houses were just released on the market "after being held up for months by legal red tape". Then how can we say that the are more NEW RESIDENTS come to city X, as we do not know that those house were purchased or not?

A is correct (out of the given options). Whether the new houses were bought or not, doesn't matter. The point is they increased the supply and hence the builders stopped building new houses. So builders being out of work may have nothing to do with how many new residents moved to City X. Perhaps many moved but there was enough supply of houses in the market.

On the other hand, (C) says that resale has increased. Note that it doesn't say that more new houses are on the market. It says that resale has increased. So people are selling their houses for whatever reason. They could be upgrading/downgrading according to their needs. It doesn't explain why builders are not building anymore and why banks are issuing fewer mortgages.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Intern
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 15
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2017, 01:08
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Labmalo wrote:
Please correct me if my logic is wrong, but the conclusion is "There must be fewer new residents moving to City X", and I think C does better job than other to weaken the conclusion (even there is a weakness in it). It doesn't matter if the ones who sold their old houses need new house or not or not, there are still many NEW RESIDENTs come to city X as they bought these old houses (The weakness of this Ans is of course there is possibility that the current residents bought those houses. But, we can not deny the high possibility that many NEW RESIDENTS bought those house and then the NEW RESIDENTS of city X increase→ weaken the conclusion)

The option A says " This year several housing blocks have gone on the market ", but does it mean that many houses were bought?? No right? Those houses were just released on the market "after being held up for months by legal red tape". Then how can we say that the are more NEW RESIDENTS come to city X, as we do not know that those house were purchased or not?

A is correct (out of the given options). Whether the new houses were bought or not, doesn't matter. The point is they increased the supply and hence the builders stopped building new houses. So builders being out of work may have nothing to do with how many new residents moved to City X. Perhaps many moved but there was enough supply of houses in the market.

On the other hand, (C) says that resale has increased. Note that it doesn't say that more new houses are on the market. It says that resale has increased. So people are selling their houses for whatever reason. They could be upgrading/downgrading according to their needs. It doesn't explain why builders are not building anymore and why banks are issuing fewer mortgages.

Thank you, I read again the argument and got it now. The conclusion here is made based on the the fact that many new buildings are not constructed. Hence the answer should be relevant to that logic as well. Agree with A now.
VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1039
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2017, 06:55
Imo A
Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors have found themselves going without work for longer periods, and banks have issued fewer mortgages. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously. Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. This year several housing blocks have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.

B. The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years. Irrelevant

C. Re-sales of condominiums have increased over the past six months. Weaken but A is much better

D. The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year. Out of scope

E. Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, has remained steady over the past year. Out of scope
_________________

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 359
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Booth '21 (D)
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 2.8
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2017, 03:31
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Labmalo wrote:
Please correct me if my logic is wrong, but the conclusion is "There must be fewer new residents moving to City X", and I think C does better job than other to weaken the conclusion (even there is a weakness in it). It doesn't matter if the ones who sold their old houses need new house or not or not, there are still many NEW RESIDENTs come to city X as they bought these old houses (The weakness of this Ans is of course there is possibility that the current residents bought those houses. But, we can not deny the high possibility that many NEW RESIDENTS bought those house and then the NEW RESIDENTS of city X increase→ weaken the conclusion)

The option A says " This year several housing blocks have gone on the market ", but does it mean that many houses were bought?? No right? Those houses were just released on the market "after being held up for months by legal red tape". Then how can we say that the are more NEW RESIDENTS come to city X, as we do not know that those house were purchased or not?

A is correct (out of the given options). Whether the new houses were bought or not, doesn't matter. The point is they increased the supply and hence the builders stopped building new houses. So builders being out of work may have nothing to do with how many new residents moved to City X. Perhaps many moved but there was enough supply of houses in the market.

On the other hand, (C) says that resale has increased. Note that it doesn't say that more new houses are on the market. It says that resale has increased. So people are selling their houses for whatever reason. They could be upgrading/downgrading according to their needs. It doesn't explain why builders are not building anymore and why banks are issuing fewer mortgages.

For us to believe that C is wrong we have to assume that developers and contractors are needed to resell the house. I thought they weren't required once the house has been built and hence they would be out of work! i am rather confused!
SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1592
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2017, 01:04
I thought B is the answer because bigger size means more people stay in one house and therefore, fewer houses are constructed. I was wrong because B talks about the average size, not all sizes of all houses.
Intern
Joined: 09 Jun 2017
Posts: 10
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2017, 10:31
I chose the correct answer (A), but still find option (C) plausible: let's assume the number of residents moving into city X hasn't changed, but the number of people leaving city X has increased and those people are selling their houses, which in turn are bought by people moving into city X=> hence, less demand for new housing as there is an increasing stock of houses on a secondary market despite the same number of people moving to city X. Where is my logic wrong?
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3632
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2018, 22:19
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Re: Recently in City X, developers have stopped buying land, contractors h   [#permalink] 08 Sep 2018, 22:19
Display posts from previous: Sort by