Free Practice Question
CR · Critical Reasoning
sub-505
Inference
The Starbeans cafe has recently hired a new manager. The manager, within a few days of joining, made some drastic changes as a result of which the number of people visiting Starbeans everyday fell by almost 40%. However the revenue during this same period almost doubled.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain how the revenues of Starbeans increased despite the falling footfalls?
Answer Choices
Correct answer marked belowA
The manager appointed a new coffee bean supplier who charges much lower rates than did the earlier supplier, resulting in substantial cost savings.
B
The manager changed the interior of the cafe, making the seats much more comfortable than the earlier seats and adding more colour to the walls.
C
The manager’s monthly salary is directly linked to the revenue; the more the revenue the more salary he gets.
The manager increased the average price of every item on the menu, in some cases even doubling the original price
Correct
E
The manager fired some of the staff, thereby cutting down Starbean’s salary cost by half.
See the full step-by-step explanation
You can see the correct answer above. Sign in for free to unlock the complete worked solution.
Track your performance and improve
Get detailed analytics, unlock full explanations, and move up difficulty tiers as you practice.
Explanation
Preview
Official Explanation
Official
We’re given the following:
Foot traffic fell ~40%
Revenue nearly doubled
So we’re trying to explain a paradox: fewer people came, but total sales went up.
This is a "Resolve the Paradox" question. Your task: find the answer choice that explains how both facts can be true at the same time.
🔍 Step-by-Step Breakdown of Answer Choices:
(A) "The manager appointed a new coffee bean supplier who charges much lower rates..."
This impacts costs, not revenue.
Trap: many test takers confuse profit with revenue.
But the stimulus explicitly mentions revenue, not profits. So this is out of scope.
→ (A)
(B) "The manager changed the interior... making the seats much more comfortable..."
This could explain customer satisfaction or ambiance.
But the stimulus says visits dropped by 40%, so we can’t credit ambiance for revenue increase.
This doesn’t explain why fewer people spent more.
→ (B)
(C) "The manager’s salary is linked to revenue..."
Explains motive, not mechanism.
Even if the manager wants to boost revenue, how did he do it?…
Foot traffic fell ~40%
Revenue nearly doubled
So we’re trying to explain a paradox: fewer people came, but total sales went up.
This is a "Resolve the Paradox" question. Your task: find the answer choice that explains how both facts can be true at the same time.
🔍 Step-by-Step Breakdown of Answer Choices:
(A) "The manager appointed a new coffee bean supplier who charges much lower rates..."
This impacts costs, not revenue.
Trap: many test takers confuse profit with revenue.
But the stimulus explicitly mentions revenue, not profits. So this is out of scope.
→ (A)
(B) "The manager changed the interior... making the seats much more comfortable..."
This could explain customer satisfaction or ambiance.
But the stimulus says visits dropped by 40%, so we can’t credit ambiance for revenue increase.
This doesn’t explain why fewer people spent more.
→ (B)
(C) "The manager’s salary is linked to revenue..."
Explains motive, not mechanism.
Even if the manager wants to boost revenue, how did he do it?…
Read the full explanation
Sign in for free to see the complete step-by-step solution to this question.
Comments
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts and help others understand it better.
Sign in to commentWhat this question tests
What it tests
Whether you can draw a conclusion that must follow from the stated facts.
Common trap
Choosing an option that could be true or is likely true — inference answers must be guaranteed by the passage.
Details
Difficulty
sub-505
Type
CR