<p>Let's put our answer for this question with our reasoning.It will be fun when the answers come out.</p>
<p>I put parents.Though the passage mentioned money repeatdely I found no evidence in the passage which makes it the reason for the success of the circus.</p>
<p>you know the difference between -3 and -2 ,right[hint 770 & 800]-SAT curve sucks!</p>
<p>the author did not think the circus whatever was successful because it attracted parents. the author spoke of adults not parents in the passage. attracting adults would have worked better. as for shrewd financial decisions, the author talked about not using animals (saving money) something about prices in relation to adults. if anything i thought the innovative answer was a better choice than the attracting parents. but after all is said and done I'm pretty sure the correct answer is going to be shrewd financial decisions..</p>
<p>it is definitely financial decisions, no argument. the circus DID attract parents, yes, but the author didn't think that was why it was successful. it's in the frikkin' tone of the passage--the way they ended with "able to pay steeper ticket rates" and juxtaposed its praise of the circus and its financial decisions...and the way they said "animals were expensive" (dont remember exact wording) but it is OBVIOUS that the answer is shrewd financial decisions, in an intuitive way. Trust me, I've read more than you 8)</p>
<p>the circus DID attract parents, yes, but also the author thought that was why it was successful. :)</p>
<p>^ Yep, my thoughts exactly.
The question was 'according to the author'... and the author mentioned in the last 3-4 sentences that the biggest accomplishment was that the Cirque introduced a new tradition... by not only attracting children but also adults (which as I mentioned in another thread obviously brings 'parents' to mind)... also, the author's obvious reason for mentioning the animals was not because he/she thought the Cirque <em>saved</em> money by that, it was because the Cirque was able to defy the norm, and introduce a new one (in the form of attracting parents). This was the whole main idea of the passage. Yes, he/she mentioned the money, but the money came because of the adults (which was ultimately the reason for the Cirque's success).
*Breath.</p>
<p>And we've been through this too many times...
Just wait another 15 days and you'll see for yourself.
(P.S... if someone's gonna reply to this and argue more, don't bother... I'm sure you have a great justification for choosing your answer ... but what's done is done. No point in arguing. Neither of us know who's right (that's why we created this thread in the first place)... so yea, good luck with your score.)</p>
<p>not arguing, just agreeing with some others who said shrewd financial decisions! good luck all.</p>
<p>^i missed the other two questions because i didn't know what unfaze and evenhanded meant.(fear of the unknown killed me!)this question is VERY important to me :(</p>
<p>Yeah, that was what I thought.. the author was so hyped about the way the circus has decided to focus on the older crowd rather than young children.. pretty much the entire passage concerned the ability of the circus to pull older individuals until the last two sentences which did mention financial information. I really wish it said adults instead of parents though.. lol.. I don't know.. I have a feeling it is probably financial ;/..</p>
<p>idk, the more i think about it, the more i think this test's CR is more controversial than usual.. maybe the curve will be on the generous side after all. either way, im happy with the 770 i got last time, so this CR isn't too important to me.</p>
<p>parents make up for the ..what...90% of the adult population.</p>
<p>Yeah, same.. I mean questions with like paucity, base, complemented/antecedent, and etc. are like still being debated by CC members.. I have taken two SATs before and, most of the time, it seems like once the answers were established there really weren't that many arguments...
I think and I am hoping the CR curve will be pretty lenient.. but unfortunately that means the Math one won't be since usually CB doesn't make them both generous...</p>
<p>For the last time it's:</p>
<p>Shrewd financial decisions (That's like the easiet question ever).</p>
<p>Paucity (only choice that fits come on!)</p>
<p>Complemented/Antecedent (only one that makes sense)</p>
<p>Base (look it up on dictionary.com. It's the anytonym of noble).</p>
<p>it is definitely shrewd financial decisions - 3 friends of mine who got 780 and above CR last time in Jan said so. i also agree. </p>
<p>it is time to admit that one chose wrong answer. it happens.
i've used cc after taking oct and jan sat1, and there were always these kinds of arguments.</p>
<p>quicks: Did I say I didn't believe those were right? No. Learn to read dude... I just said that those questions are still causing some controversy.. I agree with all of those answers pretty much..</p>
<p>it is shrewd financial decisions. The passage never discussed parents, it discussed adults. Parents is too specific of an answer choice. It's like if a passage talks about all types of cats but an answer choice only has tigers in it; it is too specific. It also works vice versa.</p>
<p>@Joe, Cool down dude. I wasn't directing it at you. I was just telling the doubters.</p>
<p>ooo.. well, yeah, it seemed like your response was for me since your post was right below mine and referred to like three words that I mentioned.. but yeah.. w/e</p>
<p>Trust me. It's financial decisions.</p>
<p>Because the author implied that those people who would be able to pay would be not kids. Guess who takes kids to the circus? Parents. So why would this attract parents any more than regular circuses (or circi? lol)? One might say that these new circuses were more mature, but let's just think about how parents probably don't have as much money as other patrons without children. All in all, I would say that parents not only aren't all adults (as it was generalizing), but the wrong section of adults to be considering.</p>
<p>Now, the reason that its shrewd financial decisions is clear. The author consistently praised those decisions, and it can be noted that by reducing costs, the Cirque de Solei was able to gain more revenue by charging steeper rates to those people who could afford it</p>
<p>EDIT: It's cause and effect. Without getting rid of animals, they wouldn't have attracted adults, meaning no steep rates. The saving money was just an added bonus in the way of answering this question, but it made it impenetrably correct.</p>
<p>I hate this thread.</p>
<p>L M A O</p>
<p>oh, 10 chars.</p>