LSAT 104 – Section 1 – Question 09

LSAT 104 - Section 1 - Question 09

December 1998

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:31

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT104 S1 Q09
+LR
Must be true +MBT
Math +Math
A
93%
169
B
2%
159
C
1%
154
D
1%
156
E
3%
162
131
141
151
 +Easier 149.106 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Sales manager: Last year the total number of meals sold in our company’s restaurants was much higher than it was the year before. Obviously consumers find our meals desirable.

Accountant: If you look at individual restaurants, however, you find that the number of meals sold actually decreased substantially at every one of our restaurants that was in operation both last year and the year before. The desirability of our meals to consumers has clearly decreased, given that this group of restaurants—the only ones for which we have sales figures that permit a comparison between last year and the year before—demonstrates a trend toward fewer sales.

Summary

The company’s restaurants sold more meals last year than the year before. However, all the restaurants that have been open for the last two years sold fewer meals last year than the year before.

Notable Valid Inferences

There must be a restaurant that was open last year but not the year before. This would explain how, in the last two years, all the other restaurants had lower meal sales while the overall number of meals sold increased.

A
The company opened at least one new restaurant in the last two years.

This must be true. We know meal sales for restaurants open during both years decreased, and we also know that overall meal sales increased. This implies there are restaurants which had an increase in meal sales but which were not open during both years.

B
The company’s meals are less competitive than they once were.

This could be false. It could be that several new locations opened and customers who used to go to the existing locations began going to the new locations, which explains the decrease in individual restaurants’ sales. The meals may be more competitive than ever.

C
The quality of the company’s meals has not improved over the past two years.

This could be false. No information in the stimulus suggests the quality of the company’s meals has not improved over the past two years.

D
The prices of the company’s meals have changed over the past two years.

This could be false. No information in the stimulus suggests the price of the company’s meals has changed over the past two years.

E
The market share captured by the company’s restaurants fell last year.

This could be false. No information in the stimulus suggests the company’s market share decreased, especially as they sold more meals than the year before.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 104 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply