It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 17:48

### 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 June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs)

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 8 [1], given: 7

Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2013, 07:18
1
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

24% (01:20) correct 76% (01:14) wrong based on 570 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency. However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure the resilience and efficiency of derivatives markets.

Which of the following aptly describes the roles played by each of the two bold faced statements in the passage above?

A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.

Source: Self
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 8 [1], given: 7

Intern
Joined: 18 Aug 2013
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 2

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2013, 07:22
1
KUDOS
get772 wrote:
Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency. However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure the resilience and efficiency of derivatives markets.

Which of the following aptly describes the roles played by each of the two bold faced statements in the passage above?

A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.

Source: Self

thanks for the question, in my opinion the answer is B. clearly the first bold portion states a fact where as the second bold portion is a conclusion that is refuting the fact

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 200

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2013, 21:51
The second Bolded portion is disputing the first bolded portion not refuting ...Refuting means to prove something wrong...Here the second portion is merely ensuing the first bolded portion in an argument ....and disputing is the exact word for that...

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 200

Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 21

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 35

GMAT Date: 09-12-2013
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2013, 12:06
Can a conclusion start with - However? (as per buks, its a premise indicator)
_________________

If KUDOS then gmatclub Test series.
YEAH!!

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 35

Current Student
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 288

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 242

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 680 Q48 V34
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2013, 01:52
I had a doubt between B and E.
I chose E.
By looking at this >>> has the potential to improve
I thought it is something which author is expecting to be true rather a fact.
If the statement would have been..
Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives improve market resilience...
I would straight away mark B

I always get confused at such level. How do you identify if a statement is a fact/inference/judgemnt/author's claim etc

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 242

Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2012
Posts: 141

Kudos [?]: 267 [0], given: 37

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2013, 06:51
How can "has the potential to improve market resilience" be a fact? It sounds more like judgement or belief. No?
_________________

Please give Kudos if you like the post

Kudos [?]: 267 [0], given: 37

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 331

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 291

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2013, 20:59
I don't understand how the first one is a conclusion... It def seems like a claim.

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 291

Manager
Joined: 18 Dec 2012
Posts: 96

Kudos [?]: 55 [2], given: 34

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V32
GMAT 2: 530 Q37 V25
GPA: 3.32
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2013, 21:12
2
KUDOS
mohnish104 wrote:
I don't understand how the first one is a conclusion... It def seems like a claim.

Hi Mohnish

It is not a conclusion. It is a "fact". As per the author, By using CCP you achieve X. ( Proven Fact ). In the 2nd sentence, the author has some sort of background research to conclude that statement 1 is not just sufficient to achieve X.

Cheers
Qoofi
_________________

I'm telling this because you don't get it. You think you get it which is not the same as actually getting it. Get it?

Kudos [?]: 55 [2], given: 34

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2013
Posts: 91

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 17

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 04:13
Confused between B and D.
Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency. However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure the resilience and efficiency of derivatives markets.

Which of the following aptly describes the roles played by each of the two bold faced statements in the passage above?

A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact. I am not sure if the second point is disputing. You dispute in case of a controversy, a negation or anything that does not support a particular scenario. The second point is just an added piece of information of CCPs. Had the first statement said that CCPs improve market resilience, it definitely would have disputed.
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point. In fact the second is a conclusion from the data point, meaning, although CCP's have the potential to improve market resilience, they can't do that alone.
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.

Please confirm if there's a mistake in the understanding.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 17

Manager
Joined: 07 May 2012
Posts: 74

Kudos [?]: 169 [0], given: 27

Location: United States
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Nov 2013, 09:05
I highly doubt the answer. If anything , IMO , A and D seem plausible.

The first one is a belief/data point . And the second is not necessarily refuting the first . It is in line with first . It just says , Statement 1 being true , is not by itself sufficient ( rather , there is more to it). It doesn't say statement 1 is not true.It just adds to statement 1. Doesn't disagree with it .

Could you please let us know the source of this ?
_________________

Jyothi hosamani

Kudos [?]: 169 [0], given: 27

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 446

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 58

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2013, 02:48
get772 wrote:
Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency. However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure the resilience and efficiency of derivatives markets.

Which of the following aptly describes the roles played by each of the two bold faced statements in the passage above?

A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.

Source: Self

Can anyone say what to source is?
"Has the potential" -> can not be a fact.
This mall has the potential to be the most successful in all the state.... is this a fact?

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 58

Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 49

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2015, 06:42
get772 wrote:
Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) for over-the-counter derivatives has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency. However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure the resilience and efficiency of derivatives markets.

Which of the following aptly describes the roles played by each of the two bold faced statements in the passage above?

A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.

Source: Self

Good question.I was able to find the correct answer!!

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 49

Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Posts: 157

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 559

Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2015, 09:34
This is how I approached it:
A. The first is a belief; the second one is a conclusion in line with the belief.- Its clearly not a belief.
B. The first is a fact; the second is a conclusion disputing the fact
C. The first is a conclusion; the second is a fact opposing the conclusion
D. First is a data point; the second is a conclusion from that data point- second is not a conclusion from the first
E. the first is a claim by the author; the second is a doubt expressed by the author.- second part is not a doubt expressed by author

Analysing B and C.. First part looks more liek a fact.. so selected B..
Please sugget if it can be approached in a better way

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 559

Manager
Joined: 05 Feb 2015
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 8

Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '16, IIMA , IIMB, IIMC
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2015, 11:53
Went with A..
How could 'has the potential to improve market resilience' be a fact. This looks like a belief. Can someone please elaborate on this?

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2014
Posts: 100

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 20

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2015, 09:53
I hope 2nd Boldface is not refuting, opposing, disputing or doubting the 1st in any way.. The 1st is saying that it has the potential, 2nd states that it alone is not sufficient.. doesnt mean opposing but going together.. because 2nd is accepting what 1st states, but adds a new info...

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 20

Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2015
Posts: 131

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 51

Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 670 Q44 V38
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2015, 23:49
sheolokesh wrote:
I hope 2nd Boldface is not refuting, opposing, disputing or doubting the 1st in any way.. The 1st is saying that it has the potential, 2nd states that it alone is not sufficient.. doesnt mean opposing but going together.. because 2nd is accepting what 1st states, but adds a new info...

I agree... I don't think the second "disputes" the first at all. I went with D, which was incorrect....

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 51

Intern
Joined: 20 Aug 2014
Posts: 32

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 6

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Nov 2015, 23:39
Why E is not the correct option?Any expert advice would be appreciated

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 6

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 195

Kudos [?]: 841 [0], given: 30

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Marketing
GMAT Date: 11-23-2015
GPA: 3.6
WE: Science (Other)
Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2015, 10:29
Dear Amit,

I think the question is flawed and suggest you to try official bold face questions.

OA (B) is incorrect here.

First Bold Face: CCPs has the potential to improve market resilience by lowering counterparty risk and increasing transparency.

Second Bold Face: .......However, CCPs alone are not sufficient to ensure.......

See here second bold face is not disputing the fact presented in bold face 01. Second Bold face mentions "CCPs alone not sufficient". That means CCPs are indeed has the potential to improve market resilience when used with other options. This does not dispute the bold face 01.

Hope it helps!!

Kudos [?]: 841 [0], given: 30

Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2016
Posts: 198

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 79

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2017, 20:10
Can the experts please correct this question? Thanks!

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 79

Re: Wider use of central counterparties (CCPs)   [#permalink] 05 Apr 2017, 20:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by