aspiring

Sorry guys, i din see that the OA was already posted. anyways my reasoning is posted.

IMO B Premise: Some airlines allegedly reduce fares on certain routes to a level at which they lose money, in order to drive competitors off those routes. Conclusion: However, this method of eliminating competition cannot be profitable in the long run. Argument: Once an airline successfully implements this method (reduces prices to loss), any attempt to recoup the earlier losses by charging high fares on that route for an extended period would only provide airline increases fares competitors with a better opportunity to undercut the airline's fares. competitors decrease theirs. Argument weakens if competition cannot make money by undercutting fares. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument? A) In some countries it is not illegal for a company to drive away competitors by selling a product below cost. This does not forward the argument. It just legalizes the method of driving away competition. B) Airline executives generally believe that a company that once underpriced its fares to drive away competitors is very likely to do so again if new competitors emerge. If competition comes with better prices, I can also reduce my prices (I have successfully done that earlier. Hence, competition cannot take advantage of price-cut in my market) C) As part of promotions designed to attract new customers, airlines sometimes reduce their ticket prices to below an economically sustainable level. This is a repeat of premise. D) On deciding to stop serving particular routes, most airlines shift resources to other routes rather than reduce the size of their operations. Not clear which resources (infrastructural, human etc.). E) When airlines dramatically reduce their fares on a particular route, the total number of air passengers on that route increases greatly. If this happens, it is a good market to serve for the airline as well as the competitors, provided they have the capacity to meet the scale.

I also opt for option B, as even if the trips per year across the toll highway decrease, the total distance covered should not (toll rates are calculated per mile).

IMO... its B.

i also used flex_many's method and got 48/13. What are answer options for this question?

i agree with student1980.. i also used the volume method and arrived at approx. 22.

I can't find any error in the original sentence. I think the answer should be A. am I missing something?

this is from 1000 SCs. Is there something wrong with this question. Please help with your answer choice and explanation for it. At the time of the Mexican agrarian revolution, the most radical faction, that of Zapata and his followers, proposed a return to communal ownership of land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards. (A) land, to what had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards (B) land, a form of ownership of the pre-Columbians and respected by the Spaniards © land, respected by the Spaniards and a pre-Columbian form of ownership (D) land in which a pre-Columbian form of ownership was respected by the Spaniards (E) land that had been a pre-Columbian form of ownership respected by the Spaniards

thanks for the good explanations. OA is D.

Thanks for the explanations. OA is indeed A.

I agree with the reasoning provided by somajoshi. I also picked B.

I also pick C.

IMO the habit of smoking is the right usage.

1. According to the professor’s philosophy, the antidote to envy is one’s own work, always one’s own work: not thinking about it, not assessing it, but simply doing it. (A) one’s own work, always one’s own work: not thinking about it, not assessing it, but simply doing it (B) always work; because you don’t think about it or assess it, you just do it © always one’s own work: not thinking about or assessing it, but simply to do it (D) not to think or assess, but doing one’s own work (E) neither to think about one’s own work nor to assess it, it is always simply doing it not convinced with the OA.. can anyone take a shot at this.. will post OA later.

1. According to scientists at the University of California, the pattern of changes that have occurred in human DNA over the millennia indicate the possibility that everyone alive today might be descended from a single female ancestor who lived in Africa sometime between 140,000 and 280,000 years ago. (A) indicate the possibility that everyone alive today might be descended from a single female ancestor who (B) indicate that everyone alive today might possibly be a descendant of a single female ancestor who had Y © may indicate that everyone alive today has descended from a single female ancestor who had (D) indicates that everyone alive today may be a descendant of a single female ancestor who (E) indicates that everyone alive today might be a descendant from a single female ancestor who will post OA later.