The prices for all kinds of fish sold in Eastville's downtown Old Market are much lower than the prices charged...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Strengthen

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

The prices for all kinds of fish sold in Eastville's downtown Old Market are much lower than the prices charged at uptown seafood stores. Old Market vendors buy fish of similar quality from the same wholesalers and at the same prices as uptown vendors do. Therefore, since Old Market fish vendors' businesses are as profitable as those uptown, the volume of the Old Market vendors' daily fish sales must, on average, be higher.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument given?

People who buy fish at Old Market stores generally have lower incomes than do those who buy fish from uptown seafood stores.

Some varieties of fish that are not available at Old Market stores can be found occasionally at uptown seafood stores.

Vendors at the old Market save on energy costs by keeping fish on ice instead of in refrigerated cases.

Many of the people who live in uptown Eastville prefer to buy fish from the neighborhood stores.

Fish vendors at the Old Market do not, on average, have lower overhead costs than uptown vendors do.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
The prices for all kinds of fish sold in Eastville's downtown Old Market are much lower than the prices charged at uptown seafood stores.	What it says: Old Market fish prices are way cheaper than uptown seafood store prices What it does: Sets up a price comparison that establishes a key difference between two locations What it is: Author's observation about market conditions Visualization: Old Market fish: $\$8/\mathrm{lb}$ vs Uptown stores: $\$15/\mathrm{lb}$
Old Market vendors buy fish of similar quality from the same wholesalers and at the same prices as uptown vendors do.	What it says: Both Old Market and uptown vendors get the same quality fish from identical wholesalers at identical wholesale prices What it does: Eliminates cost and quality differences as explanations for the price gap we just learned about What it is: Author's claim about supply chain facts Visualization: Both locations: Same wholesaler → Same fish quality → Same wholesale cost ($\$5/\mathrm{lb}$)
Therefore, since Old Market fish vendors' businesses are as profitable as those uptown, the volume of the Old Market vendors' daily fish sales must, on average, be higher.	What it says: Since Old Market vendors make the same profits despite lower prices, they must be selling more fish each day What it does: Draws a conclusion by combining the profit information with the earlier price/cost facts What it is: Author's main conclusion Visualization: Old Market: $\$8/\mathrm{lb} \times 100 \text{ fish} = \$800 \text{ profit}$ vs Uptown: $\$15/\mathrm{lb} \times 50 \text{ fish} = \$750 \text{ profit}$ (same wholesale costs)

Argument Flow:

The argument starts by showing us a price difference between two markets, then eliminates the obvious explanations (different costs or quality), and finally uses equal profitability to conclude that Old Market must compensate for lower prices through higher volume sales.

Main Conclusion:

Old Market fish vendors must sell higher volumes of fish daily compared to uptown vendors.

Logical Structure:

If profits are equal but selling prices are lower while costs are the same, then the only way to maintain profitability is through increased sales volume. The argument uses basic math logic: $\mathrm{Profit} = (\mathrm{Price} - \mathrm{Cost}) \times \mathrm{Volume}$, so if Price decreases and Cost stays the same, Volume must increase to keep Profit constant.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Strengthen - We need to find information that makes the conclusion more believable

Precision of Claims

The argument makes precise claims about prices (Old Market lower than uptown), costs (same wholesale prices), quality (similar), and profitability (equally profitable). The conclusion specifically claims higher sales volume at Old Market.

Strategy

Since this is a strengthen question, we need to find new information that increases our belief that Old Market vendors sell higher volumes. The argument's logic is: lower prices + same costs + same profits = must be selling more volume. We should look for information that either supports this volume relationship or eliminates alternative explanations for how they maintain equal profitability despite lower prices.

Answer Choices Explained

People who buy fish at Old Market stores generally have lower incomes than do those who buy fish from uptown seafood stores.

This tells us about customer demographics but doesn't strengthen the argument about sales volume. Knowing that Old Market customers have lower incomes explains why prices might be lower but doesn't support the conclusion that Old Market vendors sell higher volumes to maintain profitability. This is irrelevant to the logical relationship between prices, costs, and volume.

Some varieties of fish that are not available at Old Market stores can be found occasionally at uptown seafood stores.

This information about product variety differences doesn't strengthen the volume argument. If anything, having fewer varieties available might suggest Old Market could sell lower volumes, which would weaken rather than strengthen the conclusion. This choice doesn't address the core logic about how equal profitability is achieved.

Vendors at the old Market save on energy costs by keeping fish on ice instead of in refrigerated cases.

This would actually weaken the argument because it provides an alternative explanation for how Old Market vendors maintain profitability despite lower prices. If they have lower energy costs, they wouldn't necessarily need higher sales volumes to achieve equal profitability. This contradicts the argument's assumption that costs are essentially the same.

Many of the people who live in uptown Eastville prefer to buy fish from the neighborhood stores.

This tells us about customer preferences but doesn't strengthen the argument about Old Market needing higher volumes. Customer loyalty in uptown areas doesn't provide evidence that Old Market vendors are selling more fish to compensate for lower prices. This is irrelevant to the profitability equation.

Fish vendors at the Old Market do not, on average, have lower overhead costs than uptown vendors do.

This directly strengthens the argument by eliminating a key alternative explanation. If Old Market vendors don't have lower overhead costs, then they can't maintain equal profitability through cost savings. This forces us to accept that higher sales volume must be the explanation for how they achieve equal profits despite lower selling prices, which directly supports the conclusion.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...