Q2 - Five years ago, the hair dryer

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Wilson went from 50% of the hair dryer market to 25%. They still make the same amount per hair dryer. Thus, they must be making half as much total on hair dryers.

Answer Anticipation:
As soon as I see the "percent" in there, I immediately think about the Percent vs. Amount flaw. While their market share went down, they could be selling the same number of dryers - as long as the market itself got bigger.

For example, if they always sell 500 dryers, but the total number of dryers sold by all companies went from 1000 to 2000, the percents from the stimulus would work out, but they'd be making the same amount of money.

The answer will almost certainly deal with the difference between their percent of hair dryers sold and their total sales.

Correct answer:
(A)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Bingo. Getting good at these repeated flaws can allow you to nail your anticipation and find your answer very quickly.

(B) The argument doesn't need specific information ("They make $2.37 per dryer."); it needs relative information - this isn't a GMAT question! And they do give us this information - the avg. net income is the same.

(C) Wrong flaw (Bad Generalization). If the conclusion stated that the company's overall sales must be down, this answer would be tempting. However, the conclusion limits the scope to the product in question, and so other products are out of scope.

(D) Wrong flaw (Term Shift). The premise mentions net income, and so does the conclusion. If there was a shift between the measurement talked about in the argument and in the conclusion, this would be more tempting.

(E) Out of scope. "Least profitable"? The argument never says that; it argues just it's less profitable.

Takeaway/Pattern:
Learn those common flaws! We've got flashcards in the Student Center if you need practice.

#officialexplanation