Passage Summary: Inez thinks experts will help sell more antiques, but Anika disagrees because the buyers are already experts and the extra cost will just make the antiques more expensive.

Conclusion: Hiring professional appraisers will not lead to an increase in antique sales at the fair.

Reasoning: The current customers are already experts who don't need appraisals, and the cost of hiring those professionals would lead to higher prices for the items.

Analysis: Anika’s response is a textbook example of a multi-pronged rebuttal. She identifies two different reasons why Inez’s plan might fail: first, by pointing out that the proposed solution (appraisers) addresses a problem that doesn't exist for their specific audience (expert buyers), and second, by introducing a negative side effect (increased prices) that would likely discourage sales. To identify the method of reasoning, look for a description that mentions Anika providing additional information that undermines the premises or the effectiveness of Inez's prediction. She isn't just saying Inez is wrong; she is explaining the specific mechanisms of that failure.