Statement: “We provide subsidised tea to labourers — pay only Rs 2 instead of Rs 2.50 and get a cup.” — An advertisement.\nAssumptions I & II:\nI. Labourers can afford a cup of tea at Rs 2.\nII. Subsidised pricing attracts customers.\nChoose the option that correctly identifies the implicit assumption(s).

Introduction / Context:
An advertisement offers tea at a subsidised price to a target segment (labourers). For the message to be effective, two things must hold: affordability at the quoted price and the demand-stimulating effect of the discount.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I. Rs 2 per cup lies within the typical willingness/ability to pay of labourers.
• II. A price reduction (from Rs 2.50) increases purchase likelihood.

Concept / Approach:
Marketing claims presuppose a price–demand relationship. If the price were still unaffordable or if discounts did not sway choices, the advertisement’s hook would fail.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The subsidy is highlighted as a benefit; this assumes buyers can pay Rs 2 (I).2) The very act of advertising a discount presumes discounts attract demand (II).3) Therefore both I and II are implicit.

Verification / Alternative check:
If Rs 2 remained unaffordable, the ad would miss its audience. If discounts did not alter behavior, announcing a lower price would lack persuasive power.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I/Only II/Either/Neither each ignores part of the minimal marketing logic.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “subsidised” with “free”; some ability to pay is still required. Also, attraction is behavioral, not guaranteed—assumption is about tendency.

Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit.