Please try this:
Analyst: The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success. But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire. Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale. So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.
Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?
1. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
2. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
3. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
4. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
5. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.
Answer is 2. Please explain.
You shud not have given the answers straight up!!
anyways.. have used PoE... Answer is the least worst of the lot!!
Please try this:
Analyst: The pace of technological development brings a constant stream of new devices to the market, and many of them enjoy commercial success. But announcing new technology too soon after the introduction of a successful device can backfire. Once consumers hear about the new device, they may stop buying the one currently on sale. So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline.
Which of the following, if true, would best support the analyst's main assertion?
1. New technology often becomes less expensive after an initial surge in sales.
- This should encouarge people to buy older products as they are cheaper. This contradicts the inference drawn in the main sentence. Incorrect
2. Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong.
- One way of looking at this is..
Once people hear about a new product, they stop buying existing ones. If media outlets report introduction of new technology when the sales of current product are strong, then it might result in lower sales as people begin to wait for the new one. Hence the assertion that it is better to wait till the sales of current product begins to drop!!
Have to admit, am not very comfy with explanation myself.. but the others dont fit either
3. Many consumers are unable to determine whether new technology is superior to current technology.
- Then they should be indifferent to current v/s new technology. So Incorrect
4. Surveys have shown that some consumers make only one or two technology purchases per year, whereas others make more frequent purchases.
-Irrelevant
5. Consumers tend to be loyal to technology companies whose products they enjoy using.
- Irrelevant
Answer is 2. Please explain.
You shud not have given the answers straight up!!
anyways.. have used PoE... Answer is the least worst of the lot!!
I agree with 'not giving the ans' but I am trying to understand the question and the choices in the 1st place.
2 is clearly goes against the entire logic of the argument. We have to Strengthen the argument. Basically Strengthen the conclusion:
"So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline."
Now how on earth does "Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong." supports the conclusion ?
Moreover the logic given in the question itself is twisted.
- One way of looking at this is..
Once people hear about a new product, they stop buying existing ones. If media outlets report introduction of new technology when the sales of current product are strong, then it might result in lower sales as people begin to wait for the new one. Hence the assertion that it is better to wait till the sales of current product begins to drop!!
I agree that the logic is convoluted...
But as I mentioned earlier.. it was PoE that led me to this answer!
Does any other option look more suitable to you... please post that as well.. if nothing else, it will be a good discussion 
To be perfectly honest, these are the kind of questions you hope that you dont get in GMAT!! 
I agree with 'not giving the ans' but I am trying to understand the question and the choices in the 1st place.
2 is clearly goes against the entire logic of the argument. We have to Strengthen the argument. Basically Strengthen the conclusion:
"So, if a company wishes to announce the upcoming sale of a new device, it should wait until purchases of the old device have begun to decline."
Now how on earth does "Media outlets, such as television programs and magazines, often report on the planned introduction of new devices while the sales of old devices are still strong." supports the conclusion ?
Moreover the logic given in the question itself is twisted.
I agree that the logic is convoluted...
But as I mentioned earlier.. it was PoE that led me to this answer!
Does any other option look more suitable to you... please post that as well.. if nothing else, it will be a good discussion
To be perfectly honest, these are the kind of questions you hope that you dont get in GMAT!!
Yep I agree! And I do believe that the content can sometimes be luck driven. For e.g. the test does not know that I am a Computer Engineer and totally into science n tech, so if it throws science passages at me, I am well-equipped but if it throws a Passage such as in OG 12 about "Water rights of American Indians before the 19th century and Now...", it possibly WOULD lower my score.
Which of the following most directly refutes the argument raised in the advertisement above?
(A) Over half of the advertising revenues of the Daily Clarion come from firms whose headquarters are located outside of Gotham City.
(B) The Daily Clarion usually devotes more of its pages to out-of-town news than does the Daily Bugle.
(C) Nearly 40 percent of the readers of the Daily Clarion reside outside the limits of Gotham City.
(D) The editor-in-chief and all the other members of the editorial staff of the Daily Bugle have lived and worked in Gotham City for ten years or more.
(E) The Daily Bugle has been published in Gotham City for a longer time than has the Daily Clarion.
Ans: D. Please Elaborate
Hi Aksh,
Argument: The DB is owned and run by an outsider and thus cannot care more for the people of G
Refute: Proof that the staff of DB are not outsider
D... the only option which to an extend refutes the argument..
Hope it simplifies stuff..
Thanks,
aloser
Are you still reading the other newspaper in town? Did you know that the Daily Bugle is owned by an out-of-town business syndicate that couldnt care less about the people of Gotham City? Read the Daily Clarion, the only real voice of the people of Gotham City!
Which of the following most directly refutes the argument raised in the advertisement above?
(A) Over half of the advertising revenues of the Daily Clarion come from firms whose headquarters are located outside of Gotham City.
(B) The Daily Clarion usually devotes more of its pages to out-of-town news than does the Daily Bugle.
(C) Nearly 40 percent of the readers of the Daily Clarion reside outside the limits of Gotham City.
(D) The editor-in-chief and all the other members of the editorial staff of the Daily Bugle have lived and worked in Gotham City for ten years or more.
(E) The Daily Bugle has been published in Gotham City for a longer time than has the Daily Clarion.
Ans: D. Please Elaborate
A. OUT OF SCOPE.
B. out of scope.
C. OUT OF SCOPE.
D. Weakens/refutes : because this choice weakens the claim that Daily Clarion is the ONLY real voice of Gotham. All the people responsible for the content of the Daily Bugle have spent a significant time in Gotham are as well the real voice. Moreover the argument does not say if the staff of the Daily Clarion has lived or lives in the city. There is no evidence to support the claim that "he Daily Clarion, the only real voice of the people of Gotham City!"
E. OUT OF SCOPE.
E??
Other option deal with effects of increase in production of pepper which can not be directly inferred from the passage.
E appears to be the right answer. However, we know that appearances are deceiving. How can we eliminate E. It is given that price of pepper "has soared". It does not necessarily indicate that it has never been higher.
D has a really subtle reference. How can the production be less than sales? Possible only if you have surplus stocks and they are sold.
aksh4645 SaysAre you still reading the other newspaper in town? Did you know that the Daily Bugle is owned by an out-of-town business syndicate that couldnt care less about the people of Gotham City? Read the Daily Clarion, the only real voice of the people of Gotham City!:
I will go with option D as it is the one which says that Daily Bugle cares about
Gotham city.
-Deepak
Hi Guys!!
I'm confused with the answer to the following question, plz help-
One of the most important and constructive reforms in National Politics has been the abolition of the post of State Ministers in the various departments.
Each of the following, if true, would strengthen the above argument except-
1)There are few, if any, specific duties or responsibilities assigned to the State Minister in any department.
2)A historian claimed that the post was "superfluous".
3)People of Cabinet minister caliber normally refuse the post if offered a ministership in the guise of a state minister.
4)The office is used as a means of appeasing regional parties, by giving their MPs ministerial status and perks without giving them, any significant responsibilities.
Plz explain ur answer too.
hmm... This is a tricky one 
The statement says that abolition was a constructive and important reform..
This implies that there was not much to gain by keeping it. So we need to find the statement that does not support this!! 
1) clearly mentions that there are only few responsibilities assigned, so it cannot be the answer.
2) Can be considered.. As it is just a historian claim and if the position was superfluous in past doesn't necessarily mean it is in the present as well..
3) Very likely to be our correct answer 
Here, people of Cabinet minister caliber are only being considered. They may very well refuse the position even if it a good one, as long as it is below the cabinet level!!
This statement does nothing in particular to support the original statement
4) Clearly again not the correct option.
All said n done, I would go with third one.
Cheers...
Hi Guys!!
I'm confused with the answer to the following question, plz help-
One of the most important and constructive reforms in National Politics has been the abolition of the post of State Ministers in the various departments.
Each of the following, if true, would strengthen the above argument except-
1)There are few, if any, specific duties or responsibilities assigned to the State Minister in any department.
2)A historian claimed that the post was "superfluous".
3)People of Cabinet minister caliber normally refuse the post if offered a ministership in the guise of a state minister.
4)The office is used as a means of appeasing regional parties, by giving their MPs ministerial status and perks without giving them, any significant responsibilities.
Plz explain ur answer too.
hmm... This is a tricky one
The statement says that abolition was a constructive and important reform..
This implies that there was not much to gain by keeping it. So we need to find the statement that does not support this!!
1) clearly mentions that there are only few responsibilities assigned, so it cannot be the answer.
2) Can be considered.. As it is just a historian claim and if the position was superfluous in past doesn't necessarily mean it is in the present as well..
3) Very likely to be our correct answer
Here, people of Cabinet minister caliber are only being considered. They may very well refuse the position even if it a good one, as long as it is below the cabinet level!!
This statement does nothing in particular to support the original statement
4) Clearly again not the correct option.
All said n done, I would go with third one.
Cheers...
Thanxs Sir!
Even I considered the answer to be the 3rd one, but my key says the answer to be the 2nd option. I guess the answer may be incorrect in the key...
.. hey good one .. bro
hi puys confused with this CR Q post explanation especially those who have 100% accuracy in CR
What makes proteins so versatile? It is their size and shape. Protein chains are long strings with beads and pendants along the chain. They can adopt a variety of shapes when the chain folds over itself, offering a three-dimensional structure with crevices, pockets and surface patches into which other molecules can fit in, interact and do chemistry. It is this structural form that leads to function.(points to option A) Imagine now a protein containing two or more architectural features. One of them might bind or 'receive' a guest molecule (substrate) and chemically react with it producing a product. The second structural domain could bind or interact with a different substrate and do something else. It is this structural feature that allows for multiple functions.(points to option C) Indeed, it is this same feature of structural domains, pockets and patches that allows RNA molecules to do multi-tasking. In contrast to proteins and RNA, the DNA molecule is prosaic. It adopts the shape of a spiral staircase; rather dull with little three-dimensional diversity.(points to option B) Yes, there is the odd DNA that does have some, and hence shows some enzyme-like activity but by and large the beautiful double helix leaves DNA with little multitasking ability.(points to option E)
32.From the passage it could be inferred that a molecule can perform a variety of functions if
(A)it has a suitable structure.
(B)it has a three dimensional shape.
(C)it coordinates with other molecules.
(D)it is genetically coded to do so.
(E)it has a double helix structure.
Now seeing the CR i can easily say that option D is out of the race E also is contradicting the last line so the choice is between A/B/C
Now the question is about "Variety of functions" which is possible only if it coordinates with others.....
Hence my take would be C
hi puys confused with this CR Q post explanation especially those who have 100% accuracy in CR
What makes proteins so versatile? It is their size and shape. Protein chains are long strings with beads and pendants along the chain. They can adopt a variety of shapes when the chain folds over itself, offering a three-dimensional structure with crevices, pockets and surface patches into which other molecules can fit in, interact and do chemistry. It is this structural form that leads to function. Imagine now a protein containing two or more architectural features. One of them might bind or 'receive' a guest molecule (substrate) and chemically react with it producing a product. The second structural domain could bind or interact with a different substrate and do something else. It is this structural feature that allows for multiple functions. Indeed, it is this same feature of structural domains, pockets and patches that allows RNA molecules to do multi-tasking. In contrast to proteins and RNA, the DNA molecule is prosaic. It adopts the shape of a spiral staircase; rather dull with little three-dimensional diversity. Yes, there is the odd DNA that does have some, and hence shows some enzyme-like activity but by and large the beautiful double helix leaves DNA with little multitasking ability.
32.From the passage it could be inferred that a molecule can perform a variety of functions if
(A)it has a suitable structure.
(B)it has a three dimensional shape.
(C)it coordinates with other molecules.
(D)it is genetically coded to do so.
(E)it has a double helix structure.
You said this is a time question. Is this GMAT stuff? This is like a mini RC.
Note these statements:
1. "It is this structural form that leads to function."
2. "It is this structural feature that allows for multiple functions."
3. Indeed, it is this same feature of structural domains, pockets and patches that allows RNA molecules to do multi-tasking.
This is a CR with multiple conclusions.
The question asks: "a molecule can perform variety of functions if" -
Since in the argument it is clearly mentioned that the structural feature i.e. the 3D shape allows for the multiple(variety of) functions and not the co-ordination that is primarily responsible. We can put it this way, If the molecule did not have a 3D structure it would not be able to co-ordinate the multiple functions.
C is not correct or too narrow in scope because "One of them(structural domains) might bind or 'receive' a guest molecule (substrate) and chemically react with it producing a product. The second structural domain could bind or interact with a different substrate and do something else. It is this structural feature that allows for multiple functions." - So shape is the primary reason not the co-ordination.
Hey guyz!! I'm back with some more CR questions.
Q1) A recent survey by a leading NGO came to the following conclusion about donor psychology:
If you are interested in getting a good donation, you need to realize that Donors are almost never disturbed by being asked for too much. In fact, the result is the opposite-they are flattered. Besides, if you ask for too much, the donor can always suggest a smaller amount. On the other hand, if you ask for too little, the donor is usually offended. A common reaction to being asked for too little is "so that's all he thinks I'm worth."
The above statement assumes that
(a)Donors are usually never asked for enough.
(b)A good fund raiser will value the worth of the donor.
(c)It is worth the gamble to ask for large donations.
(d)None of these.
Q2) The reason that is most commonly quoted for nationalisation of foreign companies is a change in governance. Nationalisation tends to cover a wide range of industries and is not selective to the country of ownership of the foreign company.
The above statement assumes that
(a)Some critical industries are most likely to be nationalised than others which might not be so critical.
(b)The process of nationalisation is not limited to any particular industry or country.
(c)Nationalisation of business is so widespread as to cause concern at the international level.
(d)Sharing ownership with local nationals will forestall takeovers by foreign governments.
Please share your approaches too while answering these questions
Continuing on the previous post:-
Q3) "If the islanders are doomed to have local self governance- and it is the islanders who have determined this-then they should be ready to bear the negative consequences of local self governance." said a British colonist as he left the shores of the island he was governing.
Which of the following, if true, would weaken his argument?
(a) Local rulers are always more interested in the development of their country than foreign colonists.
(b) Local self governance is not child's play.
(c) The islanders are equally qualified and competent, if not more than the colonists, to run their own government.
(d) A group of islanders were against the transfer of power.
Plz post the approach too:mg:
Hey guyz!! I'm back with some more CR questions.
Please share your approaches too while answering these questions
Q1) A recent survey by a leading NGO came to the following conclusion about donor psychology:
If you are interested in getting a good donation, you need to realize that Donors are almost never disturbed by being asked for too much. In fact, the result is the opposite-they are flattered. Besides, if you ask for too much, the donor can always suggest a smaller amount. On the other hand, if you ask for too little, the donor is usually offended. A common reaction to being asked for too little is "so that's all he thinks I'm worth."
The above statement assumes that
(a)Donors are usually never asked for enough. - This is not the assumption. Even if the donors are not asked enough the argument stands.
(b)A good fund raiser will value the worth of the donor. - Contender.
(c)It is worth the gamble to ask for large donations. - This is the conclusion
(d)None of these. - Contender.
Note: An assumption is something without which an argument can not exists. e.g. "Donor are never offended if asked for too much".
Q2) The reason that is most commonly quoted for nationalization of foreign companies is a change in governance. Nationalization tends to cover a wide range of industries and is not selective to the country of ownership of the foreign company.
The above statement assumes that
(a)Some critical industries are most likely to be nationalized than others which might not be so critical. - Incorrect. "which might not be so critical"- what might not be critical? The nationalization or the industries?
(b)The process of nationalization is not limited to any particular industry or country. - Conclusion. -
(c)Nationalization of business is so widespread as to cause concern at the international level. - - Incorrect.
(d)Sharing ownership with local nationals will forestall takeovers by foreign governments. - - Incorrect.
"and is not selective to the country of ownership of the foreign company." - Is this grammatical?
Rita: The original purpose of government farm subsidy programs was to provide income stability for small family farmers. But most farm-subsidy money goes to a few farmers with large holdings. Payments to farmers whose income, before subsidies, is greater than $100,000 a year should be stopped.
Thomas: It would be impossible to administer such a cutoff point. Subsidies are needed during the planting and growing season, but farmers do not know their income for given calendar year until tax returns are calculated and submitted the following April.
Which one of the following, if true, is the strongest counter Rita can make to Thomas objection?
(A) It has become difficult for small farmers to obtain bank loans to be repaid later by money from subsidies.
(B) Having such a cutoff point would cause some farmers whose income would otherwise exceed $100,000 to reduce their plantings.
(C) The income of a farmer varies because weather and market prices are not stable from year to year.
(D) If subsidy payments to large farmers were eliminated the financial condition of the government would improve.
(E) Subsidy cutoffs can be determined on the basis of income for the preceding year.
Rita needs to give some evidence that proves we can estimate the farmers' income in advance. It may be the relation between size of the farm holdings to that of income , that can be derived using past data.
So, I think correct answer should be Option (E)