New grocery products benefit the manufacturer but not the grocer. If a company introduces a new brand of detergent, it...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Weaken

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

New grocery products benefit the manufacturer but not the grocer. If a company introduces a new brand of detergent, it might attract more consumers to its brand. The grocery store, however, will not sell any more detergent overall than it would have without the new brand. Thus there is little reason for grocers to encourage the introduction of new products.

Which of the following, if true, argues against the conclusion above?

Often manufacturers introduce a new grocery product in order to take business away from a competitor who already produces a similar product.

Some manufacturers prefer to put new grocery products in stores as early as possible, rather than spending time and money on controlled market research.

Most grocery stores have such narrow profit margins that they cannot afford to carry marginally successful products.

Grocers have the option not to take on products that they do not think will sell well, or that they expect will not increase the grocer's profits.

Some manufacturers introduce new types of groceries, such as precooked meals that people can prepare quickly instead of going to a restaurant.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
New grocery products benefit the manufacturer but not the grocer.	What it says: New products help manufacturers but don't help grocery stores What it does: Sets up the main claim that starts the argument What it is: Author's opening statement
If a company introduces a new brand of detergent, it might attract more consumers to its brand.	What it says: New detergent brands can bring more customers to that specific brand What it does: Explains how manufacturers benefit from new products What it is: Supporting explanation Visualization: Company A launches new detergent → attracts 15% more customers to Company A's products
The grocery store, however, will not sell any more detergent overall than it would have without the new brand.	What it says: Grocery stores don't sell more total detergent when new brands are added What it does: Contrasts with manufacturer benefits to show grocers don't gain What it is: Key premise Visualization: Store sells 100 detergent units before new brand, still sells 100 units after (customers just switch between brands)
Thus there is little reason for grocers to encourage the introduction of new products.	What it says: Grocers shouldn't support new product launches What it does: Draws the logical conclusion from the previous premises What it is: Main conclusion

Argument Flow:

The argument moves from a general claim about new products, provides a specific example with detergent to show manufacturer benefits, then contrasts this with grocer outcomes, and finally concludes grocers shouldn't encourage new products.

Main Conclusion:

Grocers have little reason to encourage the introduction of new products.

Logical Structure:

The argument uses a comparison structure: it shows manufacturers benefit (more customers to their brand) while grocers don't benefit (no increase in total sales), therefore grocers shouldn't encourage new products. The logic assumes that if grocers don't benefit, they shouldn't support something.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Weaken - We need to find information that reduces belief in the conclusion that grocers have little reason to encourage new products

Precision of Claims

The argument makes specific claims about overall detergent sales volume staying constant and focuses narrowly on direct sales benefits to grocers

Strategy

To weaken this conclusion, we need to find scenarios where grocers DO benefit from new products, even if total detergent sales don't increase. We should look for indirect benefits, different product categories, or ways new products create value for grocers beyond just increasing total unit sales of that specific product type.

Answer Choices Explained

Often manufacturers introduce a new grocery product in order to take business away from a competitor who already produces a similar product.

This choice actually supports the argument rather than weakening it. It explains WHY manufacturers benefit (taking business from competitors) but doesn't address whether grocers benefit. If anything, it reinforces that this is just manufacturers fighting over market share while total sales for grocers remain constant - exactly what the argument claims.

Some manufacturers prefer to put new grocery products in stores as early as possible, rather than spending time and money on controlled market research.

This tells us about manufacturer preferences for timing but doesn't address whether grocers benefit from new products. The argument isn't about when products are introduced but whether grocers have reasons to encourage them. Manufacturer timing preferences are irrelevant to grocer benefits.

Most grocery stores have such narrow profit margins that they cannot afford to carry marginally successful products.

This actually strengthens the argument by explaining why grocers would be even MORE reluctant to take on new products. If grocers have narrow margins and can't afford unsuccessful products, they have even LESS reason to encourage new product introductions, making the conclusion stronger.

Grocers have the option not to take on products that they do not think will sell well, or that they expect will not increase the grocer's profits.

This doesn't weaken the argument because it just confirms grocers can refuse products they don't think will help them. The argument already assumes grocers act rationally - this choice doesn't give them any new reasons to actually WANT new products.

Some manufacturers introduce new types of groceries, such as precooked meals that people can prepare quickly instead of going to a restaurant.

This directly attacks the argument's core premise by showing a scenario where new products DO benefit grocers. Unlike the detergent example where customers just switch between brands, precooked meals capture business that would otherwise go to restaurants - meaning the grocery store actually sells MORE total food products. This gives grocers a concrete reason to encourage such innovations, directly contradicting the conclusion.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...