Industry analysts said that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an

Hi Expert @e-gmat GMATNinja

Snippet from Manhattan:
The conditional tense is formed by combining would with the base form of
the verb: would provide. This construction expresses the future from the point
of view of the past.
The typical sequences for these types of sentences are either Present + Future
or Past + Conditional:
Right: The scientist BELIEVES that the machine WILL BE
wonderful.
Present Future
Wrong: The scientist BELIEVES that the machine WOULD BE
wonderful.
Present Conditional
Right: The scientist BELIEVED that the machine WOULD BE
wonderful.
Past Conditional
Wrong: The scientist BELIEVED that the machine WILL BE
wonderful.
Past Future

Why is option E correct?

Analysts SAID that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an early signal that prices of gasoline and heating oil WILL stay higher than usual through the end of the year

Thanks in advance

isn't this sentence a subjunctive mood and use of could is needed?

Industry analysts said that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an early signal of the possibility of gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usually through the end of the year.

(A) of the possibility of gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usually through
(B) of the possibility that gasoline and heating oil prices could stay higher than usual throughout
(C) of prices of gasoline and heating oil possibly staying higher than usually through
(D) that prices of gasoline and heating oil could stay higher than they usually are throughout
(E) that prices of gasoline and heating oil will stay higher than usual through

DmitryFarber VeritasKarishma

Isn't the meaning of A, B, and C wrong? I mean the "Industry analysts said that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an early signal of the possibility/ of prices" seems wrong. Does "signal of the possibility/ of prices" makes sense? Many tks!

Hello Experts,
I came across this question and through quick and easy elimination (Through v/s Throughout and Usually v/s usual) I was able to arrive as the answer. However the question tags indicate that this is a 700 level question, Can we expect a question of this difficulty to come as a 700-level question

Industry analysts said that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an early signal of the possibility of gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usually through the end of the year.

(A) of the possibility of gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usually through
(B) of the possibility that gasoline and heating oil prices could stay higher than usual throughout
(C) of prices of gasoline and heating oil possibly staying higher than usually through
(D) that prices of gasoline and heating oil could stay higher than they usually are throughout
(E) that prices of gasoline and heating oil will stay higher than usual through

Hi honorable experts,

Q1: What does 'they' mean in choice D? Does it mean 'prices'? Or, is there any pronoun ambiguity with 'they'?

(A) of the possibility of gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usually through

Hi GMATCLUB community,

In the options A and B, Though we already have a lot of pointers to take a pass on them,

isn't prices, only referring to heating oil ? We need prices to refer to both gasoline and heating oil, but based on the original construction, it seems to refer only to heating oil.


Can anyone help to clarify ?
Much Thanks

A few things are off here.

First, we already have “may be” in the first part of the sentence, so we don’t need another indicator of conditional—the word “possibility” is redundant.

More importantly, that redundancy skews the meaning a bit. Was "gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usual" previously NOT a possibility? But because there's been a recent rise in fuel prices, "gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usual" is NOW a possibility?? That's not quite the author's intention. We aren't talking about a change in what's actually possible. Instead, we're talking about what the recent rise in fuel prices might signal.

Second, “usually” is not used correctly here. Notice that we have a comparison between the normal ("usual") prices and the current prices. As always, we want the comparison to remain parallel — "higher" is an adjective that describes “prices”, so “usual” (as an adjective) should also describe “prices.” The correct form here is “usual,” not “usually”.


In (B), we have THREE indicators of conditional: "may be," "possibility" and "could." So we have the redundancy issue that we saw in (A), only worse, and the corresponding meaning issue.

We also have an idiom problem. We normally don’t encourage worrying about idioms (to see why, check out this article), but here’s a quick explanation of the difference between “through” and “throughout”:

• When discussing time, “through” implies a moving towards the end or completion of something. For example, ”the quarantine will last through the month of June” — it will last until the end of June.
• “Throughout”, when discussing time, usually means during the entire situation. For example, “the birds sang throughout the day” — the birds were singing all day.
• In this sentence, what we care about is that the prices could stay high up until the end of the year, so “through” is better.

We can get rid of (B).


Again, “usually” is incorrect, as explained above, and that on its own is probably a good enough reason to get rid of (C). The redundant conditionals (“may be” and “possibly”) give us another vote against this choice.

There's also a subtle difference in meaning here: "staying" almost makes it sound like the prices are CURRENTLY "higher than usual through the end of the year." But that's not logical because we are talking about a conditional in the future -- we don't know whether the prices will be higher yet. That's no smoking gun, but it's certainly another vote against this one.

We can get rid of (C).


The use of "usually" here is ok because it modifies the verb "are," not “prices.”

But we still have redundant conditionals (“may be” and “could”). And, as in (B), “through” would be more appropriate than “throughout.”

Also, the use of "are" introduces a subtle ambiguity in meaning. "Higher than they usually are throughout the end of the year" seems to suggest that we are referring to some consistent end-of-year price level (one that is generally repeated year after year) and comparing current prices of gasoline and heating oil to the usual level (a bit like this example, where we are referring to past data and trends: "Hotel prices are lower than they usually are at this time of year.").

Again, that is a very subtle meaning issue. But we already have a couple votes against (D), so let's see if (E) is any better.


Here we have only “may be” as our conditional, so no redundancy issues. “Through” is the appropriate idiom, and “usual” correctly modifies “prices” and keeps the comparison parallel.

(E) is the best option!

GMAT NINJA- Thanks for writing such a detailed answer. Truly appreciate the kind of work you are doing here.
My one doubt remaining would be the use of "will" in the answer choice (E)

We would agree that the author wants to discuss "possibility" right? We can surely say that with the presence of "may be" but then how can we use "will"? Isn't will use to denote certain outcomes?

Appreciate it if you could find out the time to respond to this query.
Thanks.

Industry analysts said that the recent rise in fuel prices may be an early signal that prices of gasoline and heating oil will stay higher than usual through the end of the year.

A few things are off here.

First, we already have “may be” in the first part of the sentence, so we don’t need another indicator of conditional—the word “possibility” is redundant.

More importantly, that redundancy skews the meaning a bit. Was "gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usual" previously NOT a possibility? But because there's been a recent rise in fuel prices, "gasoline and heating oil prices staying higher than usual" is NOW a possibility?? That's not quite the author's intention. We aren't talking about a change in what's actually possible. Instead, we're talking about what the recent rise in fuel prices might signal.

Second, “usually” is not used correctly here. Notice that we have a comparison between the normal ("usual") prices and the current prices. As always, we want the comparison to remain parallel — "higher" is an adjective that describes “prices”, so “usual” (as an adjective) should also describe “prices.” The correct form here is “usual,” not “usually”.


In (B), we have THREE indicators of conditional: "may be," "possibility" and "could." So we have the redundancy issue that we saw in (A), only worse, and the corresponding meaning issue.

We also have an idiom problem. We normally don’t encourage worrying about idioms (to see why, check out this article), but here’s a quick explanation of the difference between “through” and “throughout”:

• When discussing time, “through” implies a moving towards the end or completion of something. For example, ”the quarantine will last through the month of June” — it will last until the end of June.
• “Throughout”, when discussing time, usually means during the entire situation. For example, “the birds sang throughout the day” — the birds were singing all day.
• In this sentence, what we care about is that the prices could stay high up until the end of the year, so “through” is better.

We can get rid of (B).


Again, “usually” is incorrect, as explained above, and that on its own is probably a good enough reason to get rid of (C). The redundant conditionals (“may be” and “possibly”) give us another vote against this choice.

There's also a subtle difference in meaning here: "staying" almost makes it sound like the prices are CURRENTLY "higher than usual through the end of the year." But that's not logical because we are talking about a conditional in the future -- we don't know whether the prices will be higher yet. That's no smoking gun, but it's certainly another vote against this one.

We can get rid of (C).


The use of "usually" here is ok because it modifies the verb "are," not “prices.”

But we still have redundant conditionals (“may be” and “could”). And, as in (B), “through” would be more appropriate than “throughout.”

Also, the use of "are" introduces a subtle ambiguity in meaning. "Higher than they usually are throughout the end of the year" seems to suggest that we are referring to some consistent end-of-year price level (one that is generally repeated year after year) and comparing current prices of gasoline and heating oil to the usual level (a bit like this example, where we are referring to past data and trends: "Hotel prices are lower than they usually are at this time of year.").

Again, that is a very subtle meaning issue. But we already have a couple votes against (D), so let's see if (E) is any better.


Here we have only “may be” as our conditional, so no redundancy issues. “Through” is the appropriate idiom, and “usual” correctly modifies “prices” and keeps the comparison parallel.

(E) is the best option!

Hi, In option D& E if we look at "usually are" and "usual" part only, "is usual or usually are" is used for comparision between a normal trend of something to its current state (For eg: I ran faster than is usual), whereas "usual/the usual" is used as a noun which replaces for a noun with some other as in comparsion (For eg: The car he brought today is bigger than the usual, here usual refer to some other car that he brings everyday) As per the sentence, prices of gasoline before is compared to prices of gasoline now, i.e change in trend of samething.

For a moment if we consider only the comparsion flaw in sentence, can you help me where I am going wrong?

In the Choice E, the likelihood has been converted to a certainty. How is that accurate?