LSAT 106 – Section 2 – Question 05

LSAT 106 - Section 2 - Question 05

June 1999

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:09

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
PT106 S2 Q05
+LR
+Exp
Except +Exc
Strengthen +Streng
Net Effect +NetEff
A
0%
146
B
1%
151
C
1%
149
D
95%
165
E
3%
151
134
141
148
 +Easier 147.566 +SubsectionMedium

A newly developed light bulb is much more cost-effective than conventional light bulbs: it costs only about 3 times what a conventional light bulb costs but it lasts up to 10 times as long as a conventional light bulb. Despite the manufacturer’s intense efforts to publicize the advantages of the new bulb, one analyst predicts that these new bulbs will prove to sell very poorly.

Summarize Argument
The analyst predicts a new type of light bulb will sell poorly, even though it can last 10 times longer than a conventional light bulb and is only triple the cost.

Notable Assumptions
The analyst assumes there’s something about the new bulb, the way it will be sold, or the light bulb market in general that makes the new bulb likely to fail. This means assuming the new bulb’s disadvantages relative to other bulbs on the market outweigh its apparent advantage in cost efficiency relative to conventional bulbs.

A
The light generated by the new bulb is in the yellow range of the spectrum, a type of artificial light most people find unappealing.
This supports the analyst’s prediction. It’s a reason for consumers to avoid the new bulb despite its apparent cost efficiency.
B
Most people who purchase light bulbs prefer to buy inexpensive light bulbs rather than more durable but expensive light bulbs.
This offers support for the analyst’s prediction. It suggests consumers care more about total cost—where the new bulb has a disadvantage—than about cost efficiency when purchasing new bulbs.
C
A manufacturer of one brand of conventional light bulb has advertised claims that the new light bulb uses more electricity than do conventional light bulbs.
This offers support for the analyst’s prediction. It’s a reason for consumers to doubt the actual cost efficiency of the new bulb when electricity consumption is considered.
D
The new bulb is to be marketed in several different quantities, ranging from packages containing one bulb to packages containing four bulbs.
This doesn’t support the analyst’s prediction. There’s no indication consumers are less likely to purchase bulbs because they come in packs of no more than four.
E
A competing manufacturer is about to introduce a light bulb that lasts 10 times as long as a conventional bulb but costs less than a conventional bulb.
This supports the analyst’s prediction. It’s a reason to believe the upcoming light bulb will be even more cost-efficient than the new bulb in question, and will therefore outcompete it.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 106 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply