- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 944
- Joined: Sep 06, 2017
(D) breaks down because while we know the increased sales from the advertising is what is funding the free computers, we don't know that this is the only conceivable way for these advertisers to offer the computers for free. Maybe they could sell advertising space on the physical computer itself? Or maybe the advertising wouldn't have to be continuous, but only periodic or when a user opens an application. Since we don't what the actual threshold is to offer the computers for free, nor how much over that threshold the increased sales are, we don't know that we couldn't make that up with other methods.
(B) doesn't work for the same reasons as (D), even more so because it's scope is even broader than (D). "No advertiser" means even a company like Google would be excluded from offering computers free of charge if consumers never use them to browse the internet. But if Google gave away 100 inexpensive computers for free, costing them let's say $50,000, would they be able to afford it? They have billions of dollars in the bank, so it's likely they could. That's just an example, but if there is a possible example that could give away computers for free, (B) does not have to be true.
Hope this helps!