I noticed the explanation to question 5 in the Manhattan CR Question bank states the following for a Find The Conclusion CR:

The passage gives information about the concert promotion business. The question asks us to make an assertion, or conclusion, based on the information provided. Any conclusion in a GMAT Critical Reasoning argument must be directly supported by evidence from the text. Also, remember that in a Draw a Conclusion question, you do not have to tie together all the given premises.

But...the OG says the following about a Find the conclusion passage:

The conclusion will not be a specific statement about either one or the other, but rather a general statement about both. The conclusion must include both situations (premises) mentioned.

So which is it? Does the conclusion need to tie both premises together or not? Thanks!

The key is not about how many premises are tied together in the correct answer, but rather that the correct answer must follow directly from the truths of the argument. Our natural inclination when drawing conclusions is to think big, to synthesize the facts along with some large inferences. On the GMAT, however, this kind of thinking will get us in trouble. The correct answer must be absolutely airtight in its logic, drawing from the facts given in the argument and nothing else.

Rey