The recent upheaval in the office-equipment retail business, in which many small firms have gone out of business, has been attributed to the advent of office equipment superstores whose high sales volume keeps their prices low. This analysis is flawed, however, since even today the superstores control a very small share of the retail market.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

Answer Choices

Correct answer marked below

Most of the larger customers for office equipment purchase under contract directly from manufacturers and thus do not participate in the retail market.

The superstores’ heavy advertising of their low prices has forced prices down throughout the retail market for office supplies.

Correct

Some of the superstores that only recently opened have themselves gone out of business.

Most of the office equipment superstores are owned by large retailing chains that also own stores selling other types of goods.

The growing importance of computers in most offices has changed the kind of office equipment retailers must stock.

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.

Start for free Sign in

Explanation

Unlock the full explanation

Create a free account to reveal the correct answer, see the step-by-step explanation, and start tracking your GMAT progress.

Create free account Sign in

Comments

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts and help others understand it better.

What this question tests

What it tests

Whether you can identify the option that most undermines an argument's conclusion.

Common trap

Choosing an irrelevant objection or one that attacks the premise rather than the reasoning.