1928

[ptraye]

Professional athletes are overpaid. Their popularity is the main driver of advertising revenue, but they really do not deserve the salaries they make. The salary structure needs to be overhauled.

Which one of the following is mentioned as an opposing point to the main conclusion?

A) Professional athletes’ popularity is the sole driver of advertising revenue.

B) Advertising revenue is driven primarily by the popularity of professional athletes.

------------------------------

Besides t he word "sole" in A, are the two answer choices logically equivalent? If "sole" was replaced by "chief," would the answers be the same?

Thanks.

[tommywallach]

Hey Ptraye,

Yep. Remember, this isn't some kind of inference question. It's asking about what was directly stated. The passage said "main driver," which is not as strong as "sole."

-t

[ptraye]

how does that clause in the second sentence oppose the main conclusion? I believe the main conclusion is the last sentence.

[tommywallach]

It is! But it doesn't really matter here, because the question is asking about what was stated in the passage. (B) was stated, while (A) wasn't. Now, if this question were more difficult, it's possible that we'd have to differentiates between two answers that were both in the passage, but only one of which actually opposed the main conclusion.

That being said, the main conclusion is that the salary structure needs to be overhauled. But it goes against this to say that their popularity drives advertising revenue, because that implies that they're actually paid exactly what their worth, so we shouldn't need to overhaul the structure.

-t