GRE Prep Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 28Live Online Class with Top GRE Expert Mike Butville
08:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GRE course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP GRE OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon/Wed Sept. 28, 2026 - Dec. 9, 2026, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
GRE Prep Club Team Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2017
Posts: 2932
Given Kudos: 1259
GPA: 3.39
Displayco is marketing a holographic display to supermarkets
[#permalink]
Updated on: 25 Jan 2021, 15:41
Updated on: 25 Jan 2021, 15:41
2
Expert Reply
1
Bookmarks
Question 1
00:00
Question Stats:
78% (01:30) correct
22% (01:30) wrong based on 89 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Displayco is marketing a holographic display to supermarkets that shows three-dimensional images of certain packaged goods in the aisles. Displayco's marketing literature states that patrons at supermarkets will be strongly attracted to goods that are promoted in this way, resulting in higher profits for the supermarkets that purchase the displays. Consumer advocates, however, are urging stores not to use the technology because it is intrusive to supermarket patrons and may even increase minor accidents involving shopping carts.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the position of the consumer advocates?
(A) The holographic displays are expensive to install and maintain.
(B) Many other venues, including shopping malls, are considering adopting holographic displays.
(C) Accidents in supermarkets that are serious enough to cause injury are rare.
(D) Supermarkets tend to be low-margin businesses that struggle to achieve profitability.
(E) Studies in test markets have shown that supermarket patrons quickly become accustomed to holographic displays.
Originally posted by GeminiHeat on 11 Nov 2019, 06:08.
Last edited by Carcass on 25 Jan 2021, 15:41, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by Carcass on 25 Jan 2021, 15:41, edited 1 time in total.
Formatted
Re: Displayco is marketing a holographic display to supermarkets
[#permalink]
25 Jan 2021, 15:41
25 Jan 2021, 15:41
2
Expert Reply
(A) The holographic displays are expensive to install and maintain
--> cost is irrelevant to the accidents
(B) Many other venues, including shopping malls, are considering adopting holographic displays
--> we can't conclude whether the usage of hologram by other venues would reduce or increase the distraction and accidents.
(C) Accidents in supermarkets that are serious enough to cause injury are rare.
--> still irrelevant, we are concerned with the accidents, not the injuries.
(D) Supermarkets tend to be low-margin businesses that struggle to achieve profitability.
--> profitability is irrelevant to the conclusion of concern
(E) Studies in test markets have shown that supermarket patrons quickly become accustomed to holographic displays
--> if patrons become quickly adapted, so displays will not be intrusive to them as claimed, and accidents will be less likely to happen (Correct)
--> cost is irrelevant to the accidents
(B) Many other venues, including shopping malls, are considering adopting holographic displays
--> we can't conclude whether the usage of hologram by other venues would reduce or increase the distraction and accidents.
(C) Accidents in supermarkets that are serious enough to cause injury are rare.
--> still irrelevant, we are concerned with the accidents, not the injuries.
(D) Supermarkets tend to be low-margin businesses that struggle to achieve profitability.
--> profitability is irrelevant to the conclusion of concern
(E) Studies in test markets have shown that supermarket patrons quickly become accustomed to holographic displays
--> if patrons become quickly adapted, so displays will not be intrusive to them as claimed, and accidents will be less likely to happen (Correct)
Re: Displayco is marketing a holographic display to supermarkets
[#permalink]
02 Sep 2026, 23:09
02 Sep 2026, 23:09
1
Expert Reply
Explanation
The consumer advocates are urging stores not to use the displays because they claim the technology is:
Intrusive to patrons.
May increase minor accidents involving shopping carts.
To weaken the advocates' position, we need to undermine either claim or show that the risk/annoyance is less serious than they suggest.
Choice (E) directly weakens the first claim. If patrons quickly become accustomed to the holographic displays, then the displays are not persistently intrusive-the initial distraction or annoyance fades with familiarity. This removes or significantly reduces the advocates' main objection, making it less reasonable to ban the technology.
Why the Others Are Incorrect
(A) The holographic displays are expensive to install and maintain. - This weakens Displayco's marketing pitch (since stores might not want to pay for them), but it actually supports the advocates' position by giving stores a financial reason to avoid the technology, not weakening it.
(B) Many other venues are considering adopting holographic displays. - Irrelevant. Popularity elsewhere does not affect whether the displays are intrusive or unsafe in supermarkets.
(C) Accidents in supermarkets that are serious enough to cause injury are rare. - The advocates specifically warn about minor accidents. The rarity of serious injuries does not address the risk of increased minor collisions or near-misses that could still be a nuisance or liability.
(D) Supermarkets tend to be low-margin businesses. - This strengthens Displayco's profit argument (stores need higher profits), but it does not weaken the advocates' claims about patron intrusion or safety. The advocates are concerned about customer well-being, not store profitability.
The consumer advocates are urging stores not to use the displays because they claim the technology is:
Intrusive to patrons.
May increase minor accidents involving shopping carts.
To weaken the advocates' position, we need to undermine either claim or show that the risk/annoyance is less serious than they suggest.
Choice (E) directly weakens the first claim. If patrons quickly become accustomed to the holographic displays, then the displays are not persistently intrusive-the initial distraction or annoyance fades with familiarity. This removes or significantly reduces the advocates' main objection, making it less reasonable to ban the technology.
Why the Others Are Incorrect
(A) The holographic displays are expensive to install and maintain. - This weakens Displayco's marketing pitch (since stores might not want to pay for them), but it actually supports the advocates' position by giving stores a financial reason to avoid the technology, not weakening it.
(B) Many other venues are considering adopting holographic displays. - Irrelevant. Popularity elsewhere does not affect whether the displays are intrusive or unsafe in supermarkets.
(C) Accidents in supermarkets that are serious enough to cause injury are rare. - The advocates specifically warn about minor accidents. The rarity of serious injuries does not address the risk of increased minor collisions or near-misses that could still be a nuisance or liability.
(D) Supermarkets tend to be low-margin businesses. - This strengthens Displayco's profit argument (stores need higher profits), but it does not weaken the advocates' claims about patron intrusion or safety. The advocates are concerned about customer well-being, not store profitability.
