[求助]我就是图个说法！

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?

A 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.
B The sales of snacks and drinks in its movie theaters account for more of Lightbox’s profits than ticket sales do.
C 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.
D Spending on video purchases, as well as spending on video rentals, is currently no longer increasing.
E 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.
   Answer这道题答案是C吗，我选的A，C我有点想不通，求高人给个答案，要是A就无所谓，要是C请达人给个说法，帖子主题有点吓人哈

我觉得选C,因为c说选更多的电影，就可以吸引各种人群，这样就需要double screens，正好削弱对这个计划的反对。

我觉得，

作者的观点是不会盈利，题干说哪个答案削弱了作者的想法，即找一个结论为这样做是可以盈利的答案

A所指的“a younger, more affluent, and more entertainment-oriented population”不一定会去theater，所以可能是无效的

仅供参考~~~~~~

A is the answer

文章说：现在的上座率刚好够盈利，剧院希望增加放映屏幕（厅），来增加收入，但是人口不增加，所以增加放映屏幕的的做法不会给剧院带来盈利。

文章的隐含前提是剧院保持现在吸引上座率的方式不变。从而不能吸引更多的人看电影，从而不能盈利

但是A说剧院可以吸引新的观众进入影院，从而避免不盈利的情况。

C说对于剧目的选择尽量避免受众少的剧目。但是这点和文章内容无关，可能这已经是现状了，不能构成对文章逻辑关系的削弱。

不是观众数不变，文章中的population 是指的county’s population ，A中的也是这个意思

即承认文章的现实，但是电影更多的倾向年轻的有钱的观众，这说明以前这些人并不受重视，新此在可见的未来，这些将是新的观众吧