CR-Cola vs. Iced Tea

[zhangchenyuan]

A convenience store manager noticed that a cooler which had been stocked with only a cola product and an iced-tea product had 15 colas left at the end of the day but only 3 iced-tea beverages. As a result, the manager reasoned that he should increase the amount of iced tea and decrease the amount of cola he ordered from the distributor.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the manager's rationale for ordering more iced tea and less cola?

The cooler in question is the only place in the store where the cola and iced tea beverages are stocked.

On that day, a month-long $1,000,000 sweepstakes began, with prizes awarded via the bottlecaps on the iced tea beverage.

At the beginning of the day, the cooler was stocked with at least as many of the iced tea beverages as of the cola beverages.

On the subsequent day, the remaining three iced tea beverages all sold within the first hour after the store opened.

During that week, a special "buy one, get one free" sale was in effect for the cola beverage.



OA is C
the explanation:
The manager bases his reasoning on the assumption that the iced tea sells at a higher rate than the cola, but the argument does not provide any information on the respective sales rates; it only provides us with the number of products unsold at the end of a day. In order to plug this gap in the argument, we need information about either the rate of sales of the two products or the number of products stocked at the beginning of the day, so we can determine the relative sales rates ourselves.

(A) Although this choice might seem to strengthen the argument by eliminating an alternate scenario (cola and iced tea beverages were located elsewhere in the store), it does not provide any information about the rate of sales for the two products. We still do not know that the iced tea is, in fact, sold at a higher rate than the cola.

(B) Although this may support the manager's decision to order more iced tea, this choice does not address the other half of the conclusion: the manager's rationale for ordering less cola. We need both pieces of info to strengthen the conclusion.

(C) CORRECT. If we start the day with equal amounts of iced tea and cola or more iced tea than cola and finish the day with less iced tea than cola, we can deduce that the iced tea is sold at a higher rate, thus strengthening the manager's rationale.

(D) Although this may support the manager's decision to order more iced tea, this choice does not address the other half of the conclusion: the manager's rationale for ordering less cola. We need both pieces of info to strengthen the conclusion.

(E) This choice does not tell us anything about respective sales rates; logic may lead us to assume that more cola than normal would be sold if it were on sale, but this tells us nothing about how the sales of cola compare to sales of iced tea.



I don't understand about the existence of "at least" in option C. I think the least proportion of colar to iced tea is 5:1, rather than 1:1.
Please advise.
Thanks a lot.

[naresh.kumar82]

A convenience store manager noticed that a cooler which had been stocked with only a cola product and an iced-tea product had 15 colas left at the end of the day but only 3 iced-tea beverages. As a result, the manager reasoned that he should increase the amount of iced tea and decrease the amount of cola he ordered from the distributor.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the manager's rationale for ordering more iced tea and less cola?

The cooler in question is the only place in the store where the cola and iced tea beverages are stocked.

On that day, a month-long $1,000,000 sweepstakes began, with prizes awarded via the bottlecaps on the iced tea beverage.

At the beginning of the day, the cooler was stocked with at least as many of the iced tea beverages as of the cola beverages.

On the subsequent day, the remaining three iced tea beverages all sold within the first hour after the store opened.

During that week, a special "buy one, get one free" sale was in effect for the cola beverage.



OA is C
the explanation:
The manager bases his reasoning on the assumption that the iced tea sells at a higher rate than the cola, but the argument does not provide any information on the respective sales rates; it only provides us with the number of products unsold at the end of a day. In order to plug this gap in the argument, we need information about either the rate of sales of the two products or the number of products stocked at the beginning of the day, so we can determine the relative sales rates ourselves.

(A) Although this choice might seem to strengthen the argument by eliminating an alternate scenario (cola and iced tea beverages were located elsewhere in the store), it does not provide any information about the rate of sales for the two products. We still do not know that the iced tea is, in fact, sold at a higher rate than the cola.

(B) Although this may support the manager's decision to order more iced tea, this choice does not address the other half of the conclusion: the manager's rationale for ordering less cola. We need both pieces of info to strengthen the conclusion.

(C) CORRECT. If we start the day with equal amounts of iced tea and cola or more iced tea than cola and finish the day with less iced tea than cola, we can deduce that the iced tea is sold at a higher rate, thus strengthening the manager's rationale.

(D) Although this may support the manager's decision to order more iced tea, this choice does not address the other half of the conclusion: the manager's rationale for ordering less cola. We need both pieces of info to strengthen the conclusion.

(E) This choice does not tell us anything about respective sales rates; logic may lead us to assume that more cola than normal would be sold if it were on sale, but this tells us nothing about how the sales of cola compare to sales of iced tea.



I don't understand about the existence of "at least" in option C. I think the least proportion of colar to iced tea is 5:1, rather than 1:1.
Please advise.
Thanks a lot.

Don't calculate the proportion based on the existence but understand the rate at which it sold, consider the assumption i.e. statement C says " At the beginning of the day, the cooler was stocked with at least ( i.e. not less than ) as many of the iced tea beverages as of the cola beverages.
so, no:of cola beverage = no:of iced tea,
but end of the day left over were : 15 colas, 3 iced teas...that means store manager has to order more iced teas as it's demand is more compare to colas.

[zhangchenyuan]

Don't calculate the proportion based on the existence but understand the rate at which it sold, consider the assumption i.e. statement C says " At the beginning of the day, the cooler was stocked with at least ( i.e. not less than ) as many of the iced tea beverages as of the cola beverages.
so, no:of cola beverage = no:of iced tea,
but end of the day left over were : 15 colas, 3 iced teas...that means store manager has to order more iced teas as it's demand is more compare to colas.

Thanks so much. I think i get it. option C states some of the correct situation at which the cooler stocked at least as many of the iced tea as of the cola rather than the whole correct situation at which the cooler can stock at least fifth as many colar as iced tea. And then if statement C is true, it can strengthen the manager's rationale.

[tim]

let us know if you have any further questions about this one..

[raghuism]

let us know if you have any further questions about this one..

Hi Tim,

Can you elaborate on why option A wouldn't work?
I feel now, C is a good contender, however, if A is false, C doesn't help right? Is it okay to question the legitimacy of this question, considering a bit of this haste? Or is A just an ideal trap?

[jlucero]

Hi Tim,

Can you elaborate on why option A wouldn't work?
I feel now, C is a good contender, however, if A is false, C doesn't help right? Is it okay to question the legitimacy of this question, considering a bit of this haste? Or is A just an ideal trap?

Notice the difference between what (A) says and how you are using (A). If (A) is false, it means that there are other places where cola or ice tea are being sold, but you are implying that the same result found in this machine wouldn't happen elsewhere. In order for (A) to be a stronger case, it would need to say that teas were outselling colas in every machine.