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

 It is currently 22 Jun 2018, 23:20

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
Your Progress

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 June
Open Detailed Calendar

When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 121
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V37
GMAT 2: 720 Q48 V40
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Dec 2011, 10:30
B is the only assumption that is really tied to the conclusion.
Intern
Joined: 15 Mar 2010
Posts: 15
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Dec 2011, 12:45
BN1989 wrote:
B is the only assumption that is really tied to the conclusion.

I went for A too but on second thoughts B sounds an equal contender as well. The only spec of doubt I have on B is that how can we assume that falling prices due to more usage of patented technology act as a precursor to the "best interest" of the consumer. How can we assume what the best interest of the consumer is when nothing is hinted about the same.
Retired Moderator
Status: Enjoying the GMAT journey....
Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 653
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V24
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Jan 2012, 10:08
+ 1 B
d logical negative of B weakens the conclusion(in this case d last sentence).
_________________

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.

A WAY TO INCREASE FROM QUANT 35-40 TO 47 : http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-way-to-increase-from-q35-40-to-q-138750.html

Q 47/48 To Q 50 + http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-final-climb-quest-for-q-50-from-q47-129441.html#p1064367

Three good RC strategies http://gmatclub.com/forum/three-different-strategies-for-attacking-rc-127287.html

Intern
Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 10
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Jan 2012, 10:30
i still dont get it..i opted for A here..coz if other companies can produce it legally, the whole point of this argument goes for a toss..i mean there will be no more monopoly and consumers are happy coz of low prices..
I ill go with A
Manager
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 81
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2012, 02:17
I got A, but still B is also not wrong....
I am still confused,
_________________

Kudos if any of my post helps you !!!

Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 225
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Jan 2012, 21:39
Apoorva81 wrote:
i still dont get it..i opted for A here..coz if other companies can produce it legally, the whole point of this argument goes for a toss..i mean there will be no more monopoly and consumers are happy coz of low prices..
I ill go with A

Even I opted for A here but I think B makes more sense as the underlying assumption. The reason is simple:

If a company does not care about its consumers and is concerned only with profits, then it would as well patent the technology for a long time and let the consumer suffer because of the high prices. However, in order to avoid the suffering on the part of its consumers, the company does not actually do so.

If we assume that a company has no obligation at all to any consumer whatsoever, then the company need not act in the best interests of the consumer. Then, the company may charge exorbitant prices for its patented product.

Now, the conclusion says that other manufacturers should be allowed to license patented technology. Ask yourself this question: if a company does not care about its consumers, why is the author asking that other companies be allowed to license patented technology? In short, a company has an obligation towards its consumers. That is why, for the best interests of its consumers, the company should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology so that the prices fall.

Hope this helps.
_________________

Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it

Intern
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 48
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Feb 2012, 07:04
nitya34 wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
(E) Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Spoiler: :: OA
B

conclusion : companies should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.
premise : consumers loses because companies holding patent charge in-exorbitant prices in absence of direct competition.
premise : price fall when patent expires.

after going thru the options I narrowed it down to A and B as other options seem out of scope. D& E talks abt consumers preferences, while C talks abt no of patent, again irrelevant to conclusion.

negating A : companies can find legal ways to produce tech. similar to patent. This rules out the possibility tht there is absence of direct competition, thus company is getting higher price becoz of its prod rather thn monopoly in mkt. thsu conclusion falls apart.

similarly negating B : companies do not have an obligation to serve in best interest of customer. so company holding patent can charge higher price and it should not share its patent. again conclusion falls apart.

really close btw A n B .... only thing tht gives edge to B is tht A talks abt similar technology not exactly the same patent.
Manager
Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 89
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

17 Feb 2012, 15:19
"patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall".

Does this not imply that since the revenue the companies will make using the technology will decrease once the patient expires, so the companies can rather give license (get money our of licensing) and share the revenue over the period of time and maintain their competitive edge. Hence long term benefit is achieved.

I picked A :
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 143
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

04 Apr 2012, 23:48
IMO B......

why give priority to consumer than to profit?
Intern
Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 26
Location: United States
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 May 2012, 03:43
nice explanation by mysterio..
i also think it to be A but after going thru explanations ...somehow i agree with B ...
but still not very clear,,
Senior Manager
Affiliations: UWC
Joined: 09 May 2012
Posts: 385
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 620 Q42 V33
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V38
GPA: 3.43
WE: Engineering (Entertainment and Sports)
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

10 May 2012, 10:09
Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology. WHY?

BECAUSE: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses.

AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND

Ultimately, the effect is that the consumer loses.

B work with this causal relationship.
Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 107
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

16 May 2012, 04:38
(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.

Which is correct A or B ???

I tried negating the assumptions to check which is the correct answer

(A) Companies can find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.
Here if companies can find illegal ways then there is no need for companies to license patent technology.

(B) Companies do not have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

if companies do not have any obligation then there is no need for companies to license as they will be at loss....

So B
Intern
Joined: 17 May 2012
Posts: 15
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 May 2012, 11:10
mysterio wrote:
nitya34 wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
(E) Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Spoiler: :: OA
B

conclusion : companies should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.
premise : consumers loses because companies holding patent charge in-exorbitant prices in absence of direct competition.
premise : price fall when patent expires.

after going thru the options I narrowed it down to A and B as other options seem out of scope. D& E talks abt consumers preferences, while C talks abt no of patent, again irrelevant to conclusion.

negating A : companies can find legal ways to produce tech. similar to patent. This rules out the possibility tht there is absence of direct competition, thus company is getting higher price becoz of its prod rather thn monopoly in mkt. thsu conclusion falls apart.

similarly negating B : companies do not have an obligation to serve in best interest of customer. so company holding patent can charge higher price and it should not share its patent. again conclusion falls apart.

really close btw A n B .... only thing tht gives edge to B is tht A talks abt similar technology not exactly the same patent.

Mysterio,
I agree that 'similar' is the key in the option A which makes option B stronger than A.
BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 777
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Jun 2012, 00:07
In the first sight, I do not know how to choose the right answer. I choose randomly between C and B.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 175
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

07 Jun 2012, 01:31
Here it is assumed that companies are more interested in serving the customers than for the profits. The main aim of the arguement is to provide customers with affordable products that use the patented technology.

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology. - Already mentioned in the argument that companies with patents do not allow others to produce the technology. Though there is a way, they restrict the mass production by other manufacturers. - Incorrect
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer. - The thought of allowing other manufacturers to produce patented technology shows that companies are obligated to act in the best interest of the consumers. - Correct
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them. - No where mentioned in the arguement - Incorrect
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations. - Out of scope - Incorrect
(E) Consumers care more about price than about quality - The arguement presents the manufacturers perspective rather than the consumer behavior - Irrelevant - Incorrect
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2010
Posts: 20
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

Updated on: 01 Jan 2013, 13:18
1
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

a. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
b. Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
c. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
d. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
e. Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Will provide the OA after some explanations.

Originally posted by krackgmat on 31 Dec 2012, 19:20.
Last edited by krackgmat on 01 Jan 2013, 13:18, edited 1 time in total.
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1271
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: Patented Technology [#permalink]

Show Tags

31 Dec 2012, 21:10
krackgmat wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

a. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
b. Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
c. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
d. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
e. Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Will provide the OA after some explanations.

Honestly speaking, I felt the problem to be of 620-640ish level.
Anyways, the conclusion is "Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology." On allowing the other manufacturers to license patented technology, the prices will fall and the consumers can easily have an an access on the by-products of the technology. Here the word "should" plays the vital role.
Hence indirectly, it is stated that companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
+1B
_________________
Intern
Joined: 15 Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Schools: AGSM '15
Re: Patented Technology [#permalink]

Show Tags

31 Dec 2012, 23:26
krackgmat wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

a. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
b. Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
c. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
d. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
e. Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Will provide the OA after some explanations.

IMO A is the best choice.

A) if companies cannot find an alternative to patented technology, then they have no other choice than to license the technology otherwise only the patent holder can use it. This choice fully supports the argument and conclusion.

B doesn't mention whether the obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer relates to the usage of patented technology.

C is irrelevant because the argument isn't about quantity.

D is irrelevant

E is irrelevant
Senior Manager
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 495
Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 07:14
nitya34 wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

(A) Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
(B) Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
(C) Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
(D) The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
(E) Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Spoiler: :: OA
B

Premise-The company which hold the patents causes the price hike, by not allowing other companies to manufacture patented technology.
Conclusion-Companies should allow other manufacturers to seek license to manufacture the patented technology.
(if they do so then the Price would not hike and the customers would not suffer)

(B) wins
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Intern
Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Posts: 3
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 11:28
1
krackgmat wrote:
When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce patented technology, the consumer invariably loses. The company that holds the patent can charge exorbitant prices because there is no direct competition. When the patent expires, other companies are free to manufacture the technology and prices fall. Companies should therefore allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

The argument above presupposes which of the following?

a. Companies cannot find legal ways to produce technology similar to patented technology.
b. Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer.
c. Too many patents are granted to companies that are unwilling to share them.
d. The consumer can tell the difference between patented technology and inferior imitations.
e. Consumers care more about price than about quality.

Will provide the OA after some explanations.

My take will be Option B.

Conclusion : Companies should allow other manufacturers to license patented technology.

If we suggest a company to allow other manufacturers to license patent despite of the fact that the monopoly of the company from the market will be lost, then the only reason is the Consumers are the ones for which Companies care and are obligated to. Hence the unsaid assumption here is "Companies have an obligation to act in the best interest of the consumer"
Re: When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce   [#permalink] 29 Jan 2013, 11:28

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 59 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

When a company refuses to allow other companies to produce

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.