I06-25

Question

The table shows the dollar value (in millions) of selected Brazilian exports by agricultural products over a six-year period from 2006 to 2011.
      Product   2006   2007   2008   2009   2010   2011   Average Annual % Change (2006–2011)       Beef   3,890   4,354   5,081   3,890   4,564   5,077   5       Coffee   2,953   3,405   4,168   3,791   5,204   8,026   22       Corn   482   1,919   1,405   1,302   2,216   2,716   41       Dairy   139   274   510   148   132   98   -7       Eggs   30   53   95   86   115   110   30       Live animals   89   285   418   471   697   492   41       Nuts   247   294   289   304   3,307   345   7       Pork   1,022   1,209   1,448   1,204   1,321   1,416   7       Poultry   3,472   5,019   6,921   5,700   6,691   8,073   18       Processed meats   71   105   152   142   151   161   18       Rice   60   53   312   268   163   613   59       Sugar   6,167   5,101   5,483   8,378   12,762   14,942   22       Wheat   64   30   204   63   227   699   61

For each of the following statements, select  True  if the information in the table accurately supports the statement. Otherwise, select  False .

Bunuel · Answer

Official Solution:

Statement 1: 
 
Sorting by Average Annual % Change (2006–2011), we see that the product with the greatest change is Wheat at 61%, with an overall increase from 64 to 699—more than a tenfold increase. The closest competitor is Rice, with an increase from 60 to 613; however, Wheat's increase is still greater. Therefore, this statement is True.
 
 Statement 2: 
 
Sorting by the 2006 data, we can ignore products from Eggs to Nuts because both their 2006 and 2011 figures are relatively low and are unlikely to significantly affect the final comparison. The remaining non-animal products (Corn, Coffee, Sugar) sum up to approximately 9,500 in 2006 and increase to 25,000 in 2011, constituting an increase of about 2.5 times. For the remaining animal products (Pork, Poultry, Beef), the 2006 total is approximately 7,400, increasing to 14,500 in 2011, which is less than a twofold increase. Therefore, this statement is True.
 
 Statement 3: 
 
Sugar in 2011 accounted for slightly less than 15,000. To determine which products could surpass this figure in 5 years, we focus on the largest exports in 2011 with the highest average annual growth rates. There are three potential contenders:
 
•  Poultry:  With 8,073 and an average annual growth rate of 18%, it would more than double in 5 years, surpassing 15,000 (Even without compounding, 18% annual growth over 5 years results in a 90% increase, which is sufficient to raise 8,000 to more than 15,000. With compounding, the growth would exceed 100%, meaning 8,000 would grow to over 16,000). 
 
•  Coffee:  With 8,026 and an average annual growth rate of 22%, it would more than double in 5 years, surpassing 15,000. 
 
•  Corn:  With 2,716 and an average annual growth rate of 41%, it would grow to  2,716 * 1.41^5 > 15,000 . 
 
Thus, three products—not two—would surpass sugar exports by 2016. Therefore, this statement is False.

Correct answer:

The product with the greatest Average Annual % Change (2006–2011) is the same as the product with the greatest total percentage increase over the entire period.  "True"

Over the entire six-year period, the percentage increase in exports by dollar value for the non-animal products listed (Rice, Wheat, Nuts, Corn, Coffee, Sugar) in the table exceeds that of the animal products listed (Eggs, Processed meats, Live animals, Dairy, Pork, Poultry, Beef).  "True"

If the dollar value of sugar exports remained constant for the five years after 2011, while all other products continued to grow at their respective average annual percentage rates (as given in the last column), the dollar value of exactly two products would surpass that of sugar exports by 2016.  "False"

Bunuel · Answer

I have revised the question, solution, and formatting by adding more details to enhance clarity.

kavpro33 · Answer

I like the solution - it’s helpful.

gmatbd · Answer

I did not quite understand the solution. Wouldn't omitting the word 'percentage' from the 2nd statement make it easier to understand?

Bunuel · Answer

No, omitting the word  "percentage"  from the 2nd statement would actually make it  less  clear.

The statement compares the  percentage increase  in export values, not the  absolute dollar increase . Without "percentage," someone might mistakenly compare just the difference in dollar amounts, which isn't what's being tested.

So the word  "percentage"  is necessary to accurately reflect what the question is asking.

BongBideshini · Answer

Is it necessary to write "dollar value" in question 2?

Bunuel · Answer

Yes, it clarifies that the comparison is based on revenue, not quantity or volume.

hr1212 · Answer

I don't think Statement 3 is a good question here.

It is calculation intensive and just requires perfect use of calculator to utter precision like punching all numbers to the T. A slight approximation also results into an incorrect outcome. I believe there should be some more room for approximation here as one shouldn't be needed to multiply all 6 numbers to arrive at the correct answer for just one of this radio button.

This is the difference =>

2716*1.41*1.41*1.41*1.41*1.41 = 15136

2700*1.4*1.4*1.4*1.4*1.4 = 14521

Bunuel · Answer

You're right that the question requires some calculation, but both your base and growth rate approximations were on the lower side. That led to an estimate already very close to 14,942, which should have been a clue to recalculate more precisely.

For example, keeping just the base at 2700 but using the exact rate gives 2700 * 1.41^5 ≈ 15,047, which is clearly more than 14,942.

Also, the question only requires comparing three products to sugar: Poultry, Coffee, and Corn. And for Corn only you'd need to do actual calculations and use a calculator.

Unknown5612 · Answer

Percentage increase formula is (new - base)/base*100, right? In the explanation of statement 2, why is increase written as 2.5 times? Shouldn't we be looking at percentage increase instead: (25000 - 9500)/9500 = ~163%

Bunuel · Answer

You're mixing up two ways of expressing the same idea. Saying that something "increased 2.5 times" is the same as saying it had a 150% increase.

It’s just a different form:

2.5 times = (2.5 - 1) * 100 = 150% increase.

So yes, the solution is consistent with percentage increase, it's just written using multiplication instead of the percent formula.

Sushi_545 · Answer

Hi  Bunuel ,

in 2nd part cant we simply do :-
(59+61+41+22+22)-(30+18+41-7+7+18+8)>0

Avg Annual % change value  for the non-animal products listed (Rice, Wheat, Nuts, Corn, Coffee, Sugar) - Avg Annual % change value for the animal products listed

since its positive implies its greater

Bunuel · Answer

No, that would be totally wrong. You can't just add the average % changes. The question is about total export growth in dollars, not average rates. High growth on a small base may still be less than low growth on a large base.

adarsh2209 · Answer

I like the solution - it’s helpful.

NewMJ0007 · Answer

Isn't all this analysis and calculation very time consuming? How to manage these question in exam?

Bunuel · Answer

Please check here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/i06-340350.html#p3558388

I06-25

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Product	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	Average Annual % Change (2006–2011)
Beef	3,890	4,354	5,081	3,890	4,564	5,077	5
Coffee	2,953	3,405	4,168	3,791	5,204	8,026	22
Corn	482	1,919	1,405	1,302	2,216	2,716	41
Dairy	139	274	510	148	132	98	-7
Eggs	30	53	95	86	115	110	30
Live animals	89	285	418	471	697	492	41
Nuts	247	294	289	304	3,307	345	7
Pork	1,022	1,209	1,448	1,204	1,321	1,416	7
Poultry	3,472	5,019	6,921	5,700	6,691	8,073	18
Processed meats	71	105	152	142	151	161	18
Rice	60	53	312	268	163	613	59
Sugar	6,167	5,101	5,483	8,378	12,762	14,942	22
Wheat	64	30	204	63	227	699	61

True	False
		The product with the greatest Average Annual % Change (2006–2011) is the same as the product with the greatest total percentage increase over the entire period.
		Over the entire six-year period, the percentage increase in exports by dollar value for the non-animal products listed (Rice, Wheat, Nuts, Corn, Coffee, Sugar) in the table exceeds that of the animal products listed (Eggs, Processed meats, Live animals, Dairy, Pork, Poultry, Beef).
		If the dollar value of sugar exports remained constant for the five years after 2011, while all other products continued to grow at their respective average annual percentage rates (as given in the last column), the dollar value of exactly two products would surpass that of sugar exports by 2016.