Last year, Energy Corp's oil sales increased suddenly in the region of

Question

Last year, Energy Corp's oil sales increased suddenly in the region of lower Ossamia. The Chief Financial Officer of the company explained this increase as the result of industrialization in the developing Ossamian nation of Kokua. He predicts that, consequently, trade made possible by industrialization will grow between Kokua and its Ossamian neighbors this year, leading to further increases in Energy Corp sales in the region.

Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the CFO's prediction described above EXCEPT:

A. Although non-Ossamian countries have a military and trade presence in Ossamia, their oil sales last year in the region were not significantly above normal levels.

B. Mines accessing Kokua's rich natural resources were put into operation for the first time last year.

C. Each of the Ossamian countries currently have few restrictions in place on the business that can be done with its neighboring countries.

D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area.

E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Data Insights Butler

agrasan · Answer

A. Although non-Ossamian countries have a military and trade presence in Ossamia, their oil sales last year in the region were not significantly above normal levels.  
 Strengthener , it rules out an alternative explanation, thus, increasing our confidence that the Ossamia countries can have an increase in sales.

B. Mines accessing Kokua's rich natural resources were put into operation for the first time last year.  
 Strengthener , it shows that mines were used for industrialisation, hence, increases our confidence that the Ossamia countries can have an increase in sales.

C. Each of the Ossamian countries currently have few restrictions in place on the business that can be done with its neighboring countries.  
 Strengthener , increases our confidence that the Ossamia countries can have an increase in sales due to not much. trade restrictions.

D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area.  
 Strengthener , increases our confidence that the Ossamia countries can have an increase in sales because the primary competitor is not present anymore.

E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth.  
 No Impact , this option tells us the condition of their neighbours but we don't know about that. We know from the argument that the trade happened between Ossamia and Kokua so whether they are extremely wealthy or moderately wealthy, it doesn't matter to us.

(E)  is the answer

findingmyself · Answer

Last year, Energy Corp's oil sales increased suddenly in the region of lower Ossamia. The Chief Financial Officer of the company explained this increase as the result of industrialization in the developing Ossamian nation of Kokua. He predicts that, consequently, trade made possible by industrialization will grow between Kokua and its Ossamian neighbors this year, leading to further increases in Energy Corp sales in the region.

P1- Sudden increase of oil sales in O-Continent
P2- CFO says Industrialization in Kokua (Kokua is a country on is O-continent)
Conclusion: Oil sales will further grow as the partnership strengthens between Kokua and its neighbours
We need an answer that can weaken the argument above, something which proves an alternate cause for the conclusion or something that attacks the conclusion

Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the CFO's prediction described above EXCEPT:

A. Although non-Ossamian countries have a military and trade presence in Ossamia, their oil sales last year in the region were not significantly above normal levels. 
 Incorrect: This strengthens the argument by saying that non-Ossamian countries don't had the same sales spike
 
 B. Mines accessing Kokua's rich natural resources was put into operation for the first time last year. 
 Incorrect: Supports the industrialization efforts of Kokua
 
 C. Each of the Ossamian countries currently has few restrictions in place on the business that can be done with its neighboring countries. 
 Incorrect: There are only a few restrictions, which strengthens the argument saying that the macro environment was conducive for industrialization.
 
 D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area. 
 Correct: This gives reason to believe that sales have gone up not because of industrialization but because of competitors losing business.
 
 E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth. 
 Incorrect: Same as C

DivyanshuCH23 · Answer

Last year, Energy Corp's oil sales increased suddenly in the region of lower Ossamia. The Chief Financial Officer of the company explained this increase as the result of industrialization in the developing Ossamian nation of Kokua. He predicts that, consequently, trade made possible by industrialization will grow between Kokua and its Ossamian neighbors this year, leading to further increases in Energy Corp sales in the region.

Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the CFO's prediction described above EXCEPT:

A. Although non-Ossamian countries have a military and trade presence in Ossamia, their oil sales last year in the region were not significantly above normal levels.

B. Mines accessing Kokua's rich natural resources were put into operation for the first time last year.

C. Each of the Ossamian countries currently have few restrictions in place on the business that can be done with its neighboring countries.

D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area.

E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth.

The correct answer is: D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area.

Why this is the EXCEPT:
This option does not support the CFO’s prediction about future growth due to industrialization and trade. Instead, it explains why Energy Corp may have gained market share last year—because a competitor lost credibility. That’s a past event tied to competitive advantage, not to economic or trade expansion driven by Kokua’s industrialization.

How the other options support the prediction:
• A: Suggests Energy Corp’s growth is region-specific, not due to external players—supports the idea that local industrialization is the cause.
• B: Directly ties Kokua’s resource development to industrial growth—fueling future trade.
• C: Indicates low trade barriers, making increased regional trade more likely.
• E: A neighboring country with growing demand supports the idea of expanded trade and oil sales.

so answer is D

okHedwig · Answer

Correct Ans is A:
Here is why I believe
(Mind you this is an Except Q, which means all other ans will strengthen author pov except 1)

A. Although non-Ossamian countries have a military and trade presence in Ossamia, their oil sales last year in the region were not significantly above normal levels. -  this is not strengthening the author pov that trade presence will lead to increase in sales

B. Mines accessing Kokua's rich natural resources were put into operation for the first time last year. - this will result in increase oil sales

C. Each of the Ossamian countries currently have few restrictions in place on the business that can be done with its neighboring countries. - few restriction means more business, more sales

D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area. - competitor had an accident which provided an edge to the Energy Corp sales

E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth. - growing population with disposable wealth means more chance of trade

Hope this helps!
Thanks!!

agrasan · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB   MartyMurray   DmitryFarber

I had attempted this question but got it wrong. I wanted to know what was wrong in my reasoning.

D. One of Energy Corp's primary competitors had a tanker accident early last year that caused environmental damage in Ossamia and damaged the company's standing in the area.  
 Strengthener , increases our confidence that the Ossamia countries can have an increase in sales because the primary competitor is not present anymore. We know from the argument that the trade happened between Ossamia and Kokua, and  the author has given us a causation link .

E. One of Ossamia's neighbors, a developing nation, has a growing population with a reasonable amount of disposable wealth.  
 No Impact,  this option tells us the condition of their neighbours but we don't know about that. We know from the argument that the trade happened between Ossamia and Kokua so whether they are extremely wealthy or moderately wealthy, it doesn't matter to us.

DmitryFarber · Answer

This thing is a mess --do not study this question!  The GMAT will not require the kind of logical leaps that these answers require. I see what the author was thining: let's create a wide-open scenario with little information, and then anything that seems to have a bearing on potential sales may be a strengthener. The problem with that is that in the absence of information, it's hard to do much with these answers.

Let's take a look at B, for instance. Okay, so there's a new source of materials for trade in K. But does that mean it will trade with its neighbors? How do we know those materials won't all be used domestically, or traded with overseas partners?

Or what about E? It just says that one neighboring country has some money. So what? We have no idea at all whether they will spend any of it trading with K.

We can't rely on this kind of loose, assumption-based reasoning in CR. This wouldn't fly on the test.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation

Reading the question: we review the prompt, which contains a causal argument and also a prediction. The easiest thing to do will be to strengthen and/or weaken the prediction using the most common error of causation, introducing a new, real, cause. The question is whether X really causes Y, where X is industrialization in the country and Y is an increase in oil sales.

Applying the filter: (A) doesn't even concern the relevant countries, so it's not a strengthener and may be the correct answer. Choice (B) sounds like industrialization, which would make it a mild strengthener as the cause of oil sales, and hence not the answer. Choice (C) is a mild strengthener--few restrictions will allow oil sales to grow freely. Choice (D) is a strengthener, because it will help establish that Energy Corp and not its competitors will be able to reap benefits. Choice (E) is a mild strengthener, because it suggests there is a buyer of the oil.

The correct answer is (A).

Last year, Energy Corp's oil sales increased suddenly in the region of

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