Stimulus Breakdown:
Xavier: Conclusion - it's not surprising the new fast-food place is out of business. Premises - they had no indoor seating and few people want to sit outside and breathe exhaust while they eat. Miranda: Conclusion - it was irresponsible of the bank to lend the fast food money. Premise - the bank should have realized that a fast-food place without indoor seating in that location was likely to fail.
Answer Anticipation:
Xavier and Miranda seem to agree on two points. First, they seem to agree that the restaurant's failure was predictable. Second, they seem to agree that the failure was tied to a lack of indoor seating.
Correct answer:
E
Answer choice analysis:
(A) Both speakers agree that few people want to sit outside in the location of the failed restaurant, but we can't infer from that that few people want to sit outside to eat in general.
(B) Like A, this is too general. The claims about the indoor seating are specific to a fast-food restaurant in a particular location. Furthermore, Xavier doesn't speak on bank lending.
(C) Illegal negation! We can infer that the lack of indoor seating contributed to the failure of the restaurant, but that doesn't mean that having indoor seating would have led to the restaurant's success.
(D) It's not the presence of outdoor seating that's the problem: it's total absence of indoor seating.
(E) This is a really hard answer choice to pick, but it is the correct one. Miranda clearly speaks on this issue, but what about Xavier? Well, if he thinks it's unsurprising the business closed, and it closed for reasons that are predictable, we can infer that he thinks it was a risky venture. You can confirm this one is correct by using the interview technique. If you asked each speaker "Was the new fast-food place on 10th street a risky business venture?" both would answer "yes."
Takeaway/Pattern:
While ID the Disagreement questions are more common, you should still be on the lookout for ID the Agreement questions. Approach them the same way, finding the overlap between the speakers' statements and using the interview technique with any answer that seems tempting.
#officialexplanation