In January of last year the Moviemania chain of movie theaters started propping its popcorn in canola oil, instead of...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
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?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| 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. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by explaining what Moviemania did (switched oils), then tells us what they're claiming now (the change hurt sales), and finally challenges that claim by pointing to contradictory evidence from their own sales data.
Main Conclusion:
Moviemania's claim that switching to canola oil hurt popcorn sales is false.
Logical Structure:
The author uses Moviemania's own sales figures as evidence against their claim. If sales actually went up 5% (according to their own data), then logically the oil change couldn't have hurt sales like they're saying it did.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Strengthen - We need to find information that makes the author's conclusion more believable. The author concludes that Moviemania's claim is false because sales actually went up 5%.
Precision of Claims
The key claims involve precise quantities (5% increase), timing (January switch, comparing last year to previous year), and business activities (oil switching, sales figures). We need to be careful about what exactly increased and when.
Strategy
To strengthen the author's argument against Moviemania's claim, we need information that either: (1) shows the 5% increase is even more impressive given the circumstances, (2) eliminates alternative explanations for why Moviemania might think sales dropped, or (3) provides additional evidence that the oil switch didn't hurt sales. We want to make it even clearer that Moviemania is wrong about the oil change hurting sales.
This strengthens the author's argument significantly. If total refreshment sales increased by less than \(5\%\), but popcorn sales increased by exactly \(5\%\), this means popcorn outperformed the overall refreshment category. This makes it even more convincing that the oil change didn't hurt popcorn sales - in fact, popcorn was doing better than average for refreshments. This directly supports the author's conclusion that Moviemania's claim is false.
This tells us about Moviemania's profit structure (food vs. tickets) but doesn't help us evaluate whether the oil change hurt popcorn sales specifically. Whether they make more money on food or tickets has no bearing on whether switching oils affected popcorn sales numbers. This is irrelevant to strengthening the author's argument.
This actually works against the author's argument. If customers prefer coconut oil popcorn taste, this could explain why Moviemania thinks sales were hurt - even if the raw numbers went up \(5\%\), customer satisfaction may have declined. This provides a reason to believe Moviemania's concern might be valid, which weakens rather than strengthens the author's position.
This provides an alternative explanation that could actually weaken the author's argument. If attendance was \(20\%\) higher, then popcorn sales should have increased much more than just \(5\%\). The relatively small increase in popcorn sales despite much higher attendance could suggest that the oil change did hurt per-capita popcorn consumption, supporting Moviemania's claim rather than refuting it.
Information about sales patterns from the year before last doesn't help evaluate whether last year's oil change affected sales. This historical data about a different time period is irrelevant to determining whether the switch to canola oil specifically impacted popcorn sales last year. It neither strengthens nor weakens the current argument.