Lightbox, Inc., owns almost all of the movie theaters in Washington County and has announced plans to double the number of movie screens it has in the county within five years. Yet attendance at Lightbox’s theaters is only just large enough for profitability now and the county’s population is not expected to increase over the next ten years. Clearly, therefore, if there is indeed no increase in population, Lightbox’s new screens are unlikely to prove profitable.
Which of the following, if true about Washington County, most seriously weakens the argument?
Though little change in the size of the population is expected, a pronounced shift toward a younger, more affluent, and more entertainment-oriented population is expected to occur.
The sales of snacks and drinks in its movie theaters account for more of Lightbox’s profits than ticket sales do.
In selecting the mix of movies shown at its theaters, Lightbox’s policy is to avoid those that appeal to only a small segment of the moviegoing population.
Spending on video purchases, as well as spending on video rentals, is currently no longer increasing.
There are no population centers in the county that are not already served by at least one of the movie theaters that Lightbox owns and operates.
问题分析：A明显谈的就是人口变化问题，文章反复在谈的就是人口多少和屏幕变大是否盈利这两个事情之间的关系，留着。B说卖快餐饮料和卖票哪个更挣钱，很扯的一个选项，杀！C说选择联映的时候，这个公司的政策会避免受众人数较少的电影，选择的都是大众口味电影和影院是否盈利没有关系，除非你把这个选项发散成既然电影都很大众化，大家就都去看电影了，主观答案一个。D说购买或者租赁电影的花费不会上涨了，没说，杀。E说是否有人口密集的地方没有影院，显然无关，杀.
