Statement–Assumption — Advertisement: “Enroll with us before 30 November to get the advantage of our 20% discount offer.” Assumptions: I. The discount offer is bound to attract good students as well. II. Even students who currently cannot afford the coaching fees may join because of the discount.

Introduction / Context:
This is a Statement–Assumption item based on advertising persuasion. The coaching class promotes a 20% discount valid until 30 November. We must identify which background beliefs must be true for the ad to make sense, not what might incidentally be true.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• An offer: 20% fee discount, time-bound.
• Goal: increase enrollments before the deadline.
• No claim is made about student quality or about the discount being sufficient to overcome unaffordability.

Concept / Approach:
An assumption is implicit if the communication relies on it to achieve its purpose. Ads assume that incentives can nudge some prospective customers, but they need not assume specifics like “good students will certainly be attracted” or “students who cannot afford fees will now join.” Those are stronger and more particular claims than needed.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Test Assumption I: The ad’s success does not depend on attracting good students in particular; any additional enrollments meet the commercial purpose. Thus I is not necessary.2) Test Assumption II: A 20% reduction may still leave fees unaffordable for some; the ad does not rely on converting the financially constrained specifically. Hence II is not necessary.

Verification / Alternative check:
Marketing promotions generally presume marginal conversion among price-sensitive prospects, without committing to quality strata or affordability thresholds.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I-only or II-only impose unnecessary specifics; “both” compounds the overreach; “either” still overcommits.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading promotional copy as a guarantee about which exact audience segments will respond.

Final Answer:
if neither I nor II is implicit