PrepTest 132, Section 2, Question 22
Drug company manager: Our newest product is just(32 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(8 more words not shown)
- AThe drug company(20 more words not shown)
- BMany new products(10 more words not shown)
- CThe drug company(19 more words not shown)
- DUndertaking a new(16 more words not shown)
- EConsumer demand for(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A chance to save the product isn't a reason to spend any amount trying.
Maybe a new campaign would help. Perhaps customers just haven't heard about the product or don't understand it. But what would that campaign cost? What else could the company do with the money? The manager moves from “this could work” to “we should try it” without considering what the attempt would require.
Buying lottery tickets gives someone a chance at a huge prize. That doesn't make spending the whole household budget on tickets a good decision. The possible benefit has to be considered alongside the cost and the uses that money would otherwise have.
What we’re looking for
For a weakener, I'd look for that neglected cost. If funding this attempt takes resources away from valuable work elsewhere in the company, trying to rescue one struggling product might create a bigger problem.
Working the answers
- A
Heavy investment and the prospect of a loss help explain why the manager wants to rescue the product. They don't identify a reason the proposed campaign would be a bad next step. Money already spent doesn't justify every further expense, but A supplies no new cost or obstacle that undermines this recommendation.
- B
The manager already admits that the campaign might fail. Saying many new products fail with or without marketing doesn't give us much information about this product's chances, costs, or alternatives. Acknowledged uncertainty isn't the same as a reason that this attempt isn't worth making.
- C
The rule applies when a campaign has no chance of success. Here, the manager says there is a chance. We aren't given evidence that the campaign falls into C's no-chance category, so the rule doesn't supply a reason to reject this proposal.
- DCorrect
Funding the new campaign would force cuts to existing campaigns and endanger the company overall. That is a concrete cost the manager hasn't considered. Saving one product might be desirable, but risking the broader business for a chance to do so makes the recommendation much less convincing.
The manager doesn't have to be wrong that the campaign could save the product. D weakens the claim that trying it is therefore something the company should do.
- E
Strong demand for other products doesn't tell us what launching this campaign would do to those products or their support. Unlike D, E doesn't say the campaign would force cuts or jeopardize the successful business. We would have to add that connection ourselves.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.