返回列表 发帖

请看GWD-5-15

Q15:

Lightbox, Inc., owns almost all of the movie theaters in Washington County and has announced plans to double the number of movie screens it has in the county within five years. Yet attendance at Lightbox’s theaters is only just large enough for profitability now and the county’s population is not expected to increase over the next ten years. Clearly, therefore, if there is indeed no increase in population, Lightbox’s new screens are unlikely to prove profitable.

Which of the following, if true about Washington County, most seriously weakens the argument?

Though little change in the size of the population is expected, a pronounced shift toward a younger, more affluent, and more entertainment-oriented population is expected to occur. The sales of snacks and drinks in its movie theaters account for more of Lightbox’s profits than ticket sales do. In selecting the mix of movies shown at its theaters, Lightbox’s policy is to avoid those that appeal to only a small segment of the movie going population. Spending on video purchases, as well as spending on video rentals, is currently no longer increasing. There are no population centers in the county that are not already served by at least one of the movie theaters that Lightbox owns and operates.

The key is A, I chose C. C is also logic, since the company can also increase the population who come to see the cinema.Please give me some tips. Thank you!

收藏 分享

C is out of the scope,文中没有提到怎么选电影,如果要weaken evidences即人口十年之内不会增加, A中阐明了潜在人口的增加,起到了weaken的作用. 呵呵..其实我开始和你犯了一样的错误.

TOP

C.这个行为可能之前就已经这样做了。所以不能表示增加之后能够带来额外的收益。

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看