hard-to-define quality called exclusivity

[ChandraXXX]

Certain items—those with that hard-to-define quality called exclusivity—have the odd property, when they become available for sale, of selling rapidly even though they are extremely expensive. In fact, trying to sell such an item fast by asking too low a price is a serious error, since it calls into question the very thing—exclusivity—that is supposed to be the item’s chief appeal. Therefore, given that a price that will prove to be right is virtually impossible for the seller to gauge in advance, the seller should make sure that any error in the initial asking price is in the direction of setting the price too high.

The argument recommends a certain pricing strategy on the grounds that

(A) this strategy lacks a counterproductive feature of the rejected alternative

(B) this strategy has all of advantages of the rejected alternative, but fewer of its disadvantages

© experience has proven this strategy to be superior, even though the reasons for this superiority elude analysis

(D) this strategy does not rely on prospective buyers estimates of value

(E) the error associated with this strategy, unlike the error associated with the rejected alternative, is likely to go unnoticed

[chaliya]

IMO E.

Certain items—those with that hard-to-define quality called exclusivity—have the odd property, when they become available for sale, of selling rapidly even though they are extremely expensive. In fact, trying to sell such an item fast by asking too low a price is a serious error, since it calls into question the very thing—exclusivity—that is supposed to be the item’s chief appeal. Therefore, given that a price that will prove to be right is virtually impossible for the seller to gauge in advance, the seller should make sure that any error in the initial asking price is in the direction of setting the price too high.

The argument recommends a certain pricing strategy on the grounds that

(A) this strategy lacks a counterproductive feature of the rejected alternative

(B) this strategy has all of advantages of the rejected alternative, but fewer of its disadvantages

© experience has proven this strategy to be superior, even though the reasons for this superiority elude analysis

(D) this strategy does not rely on prospective buyers estimates of value

(E) the error associated with this strategy, unlike the error associated with the rejected alternative, is likely to go unnoticed

 

in 1st go u cud set price high , so if we make ny mistake , price can be lower , so error made on high price can go unnoticed !

[devp]

I would go with A. The strategy to set the price higher is better than the strategy to set it lower because by setting it higher we can still maintain the "exclusivity", so it "lacks" the counterproductive feature of "losing the exclusivity" of the alternate strategy.

[haveto]

Imo: A

[ChandraXXX]

excellent devp...i am clear now. Thanks. OA is A.