Narcissa

I dont think it's parents because 1) parents were NEVER mentioned in the passage and 2) there are more than one successful parts of the cirque. I'm sure "attracting adults" was one of them. and financial successes were another one. Who's to say that making money isn't a SUCCESS? I'm sure I can dig up some sources that say so.

So the question is: which "success" did the SAT PASSAGE emphasize?

Narcissa

this is what the passage said:

Cirque du soleil was smart in that it did not use animals, unlike other circuses. That was a smart move because such animals were hard to control and were very costly to maintain. In addition, it targeted another audience entirely, different from most circuses which targetted children. Cirque targetted "adults and corporate clients" who enjoyed its shows and, consequently, were able to pay for steeper ticket prices.


i dont know, but i still think it's financial decisions

ALSO, the passage you posted seemed to imply shrewd financial decisions, which could've come before the passage.

Another compelling aspect of Cirque du Soleil's success (what is this "success"? I think this is your answer if you can define "success") is that it did not win ("win" what? this implies winning money aka being financially successful) by taking customers from the already shrinking demand for the circus industry, which historically catered to children. Cirque du Soleil did not compete (competing=money=this "success" dealt with monetary issues) with Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey's Circus to make this happen. Instead it created uncontested new market space that made the competition irrelevant (this sentence reinforces the "shrewd financial decisions" point). It appealed to a whole new group of customers - adults and corporate clients prepared to pay a price that is several times as expensive as traditional circuses for their unprecedented entertainment experience.[/b] Significantly, one of the first Cirque productions was titled "We Reinvent the Circus".

THIS passage states that one of the reasons for their financial success is getting adults to come to their circus. Our test says this PLUS the animals. So altho in this new passage financial success=adults coming to circus, the one we got was different, where financial success=not just adults coming to circus, but also not using animals

Feed

^ Not the passage, the AUTHOR. I'm being picky, aren't I? (Pardon).

1) It mentioned 'not only children but adults'... Adults mentioned with children? Yea, I think that was too general, but I think it might... refer to parents.

2) The author, at one point, in the passage clearly mentioned ... (after talking about how the Cirque got over the animals part)... that a greater accomplishment (aka success) of the Cirque was to provide entertainment not only for children but also for adults.

I really am done with this thread.
I believe what I put is right. So, I'm out of here.

Joe_L514

The passage definitely spoke more about this whole "new audience" but an answer of attracting a new audience wasn't available ... I mean I put down attracting parents and, even, I think it's financial decisions..
Oh yeah, I don't know how you guys can claim the passage focused on money when it only mentioned money twice, when he talked about how adults are willing to pay more and how not using the animals saved money.. but yeah ... it's financial decisions ; /

Narcissa

it did not say "great accomplishment" it just said "another aspect of the cirque" or something like that. if it said "greater accomplishment" that would've been easier.

"not only children but adults" does not imply parents. just like "not only cats but also dogs" does not imply that they are related in any way...plus i think it wouldn't BE parents because parents would usually bring their children, which would then defeat the purpose of this passage. "adults and corporate clients" kinda implies single people or people otherwise not burdened by kids.

gashawnesro

At the time I was ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that attracting parents was the only possible answer.Someone should get that passage.

Narcissa

it might not even exist. collegeboard is weird

gashawnesro

^did you see what they did to the original lake vostok article?ETS is a monster

Quicksandslowly

^exactly how did ETS twist the Lake Vostok passage?

Narcissa

the more i think about it the more sense financial decisions makes to me

and yeah..screw ETS!! (and their acorns!) >:|

but oh well, it's only a few points (okay, so 30).

pervez

you guys know the question with the animation which resembles today or something like that?

answer !

computergeek173

@Narcissa: Yeah, but the acorn logo is a trademark. It said so on the front cover of the test booklet

(Yes, I was so bored I actually read it)

Narcissa

fine, screw their trademark acorns
HAHAHA that sounds so wrongggggggggg