Last visit was: 31 Oct 2024, 16:06 It is currently 31 Oct 2024, 16:06
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
555-605 Level|   Strengthen|                  
avatar
Acme
Joined: 12 Feb 2020
Last visit: 02 Feb 2022
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 138
Location: India
Posts: 26
Kudos: 58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 27 Sep 2024
Posts: 3,503
Own Kudos:
7,000
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert reply
Posts: 3,503
Kudos: 7,000
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,313
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,313
Kudos: 238
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 27 Sep 2024
Posts: 3,503
Own Kudos:
7,000
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert reply
Posts: 3,503
Kudos: 7,000
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
AndrewN
The crucial question is whether it must be true for the two to refer to same thing in order to strengthen the reasoning—is grinding the same as processing? Are processors of cacao the same as manufacturers? Maybe, maybe not. We are not in a position to make that call. Then, you called attention to several, and I agree that this vague qualifying language, similar to some, does not present a clear enough picture for us to say that the information affects anything. If, say, the two pieces of information aligned perfectly, a best case scenario, and there were only 100 European and North American manufacturers, several could refer to 3 or to 23, and the two extremes, whatever we might set as the upper limit of several, could affect our judgment one way or the other. Thus, the information needs to be further qualified, and we cannot say that (B) strengthens the reasoning.

I hope that helps. Thank you for following up.

- Andrew

Hi AndrewN - a completely grammar related question :)

In the yellow highlight specifically , i noticed you used the adjective - qualifying (in the phrase qualifying langauge)

I looked up the phrase - qualifying lanaguage and I was surprised that the adjective meant -- vagueness / being wishy -washy / not being specific [language]

This suprised me because

In the world of the GMAT -- doesnt the phrase -- "To qualify" -- actually mean To- limit / To add conditions ? I have seen the GMAT use the phrase "To qualify a claim" / "To qualify the author's response" -- in the context of -- to limit / to add conditions to the claim / to limit / to add conditions to the answer To qualify a claim on the GMAT

Curious, how come, the same 'qaulifying' -- means vagueness / wishy washy on one hand BUT 'To qualify' means to limit / to add conditions on the other hand.

Just wondering if you could re-concile this usage

Strange question, so apologies in advance.
Hello, jabhatta2. I meant qualifying in the sense of adding a further description or providing a fuller picture of something. Why can a word carry completely contrary meanings? Welcome to the oddities of language, my friend. On a related note, sometimes two opposing words can mean the same thing in a given context. For example, whether you say that something has a fat chance or a slim chance of happening, it is understood to mean that the event is unlikely to occur. Whether you say you are up or down for something (typically, an activity), it is understood to mean that you are eager to participate. Go figure.

If you find an unabridged dictionary such as the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) and read through the etymologies of the different uses for a particular word, then it starts to make at least a little more sense. You can see how meanings changed over time, or how, through cultural contact, the same word could hold different interpretations.

- Andrew
avatar
ritikajuneja39
Joined: 01 Oct 2018
Last visit: 04 Jun 2022
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 22
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I have a quick question: If we were to modify Option D to say that the "Governments of Europe and North America are likely to relax restrictions on cocoa imports", it would still not be the correct answer, right? And that's because the Government relaxing restrictions would still have no impact on how much cocoa can be supplied (unless the option mentions that relaxation of such restrictions would enable suppliers to supply more cocoa compared to what is being currently supplied). AndrewN

But which option would be the correct answer if an option clearly mentions that the relaxation of restrictions would enable suppliers to supply more cocoa?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 27 Sep 2024
Posts: 3,503
Own Kudos:
7,000
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert reply
Posts: 3,503
Kudos: 7,000
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ritikajuneja39
I have a quick question: If we were to modify Option D to say that the "Governments of Europe and North America are likely to relax restrictions on cocoa imports", it would still not be the correct answer, right? And that's because the Government relaxing restrictions would still have no impact on how much cocoa can be supplied (unless the option mentions that relaxation of such restrictions would enable suppliers to supply more cocoa compared to what is being currently supplied). AndrewN

But which option would be the correct answer if an option clearly mentions that the relaxation of restrictions would enable suppliers to supply more cocoa?
Hello, ritikajuneja39. You have it exactly right in the first part. No supply = no difference, in terms of the effects of governmental restrictions on imports. As for the follow-up question, you do not have to worry about facing such a dilemma: GMAC™ spends a lot of money on each question to ensure that there is one clearcut option that stands above the rest. There cannot be two correct answers. However, if the supply chain were not an issue and governmental relaxation of restrictions would enable suppliers to provide more cocoa, then such a set of circumstances would seem to disfavor the prediction that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future. We would expect a plentiful supply to lead to lower prices of cocoa.

Perhaps that clarifies a matter or two. Thank you for following up, and good luck with your studies.

- Andrew
User avatar
PriyamRathor
Joined: 17 Aug 2021
Last visit: 24 May 2024
Posts: 153
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 167
Location: India
WE:Corporate Finance (Accounting)
Posts: 153
Kudos: 100
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
Supply shortages and signs of growing demand are driving cocoa prices upward. Unusually severe weather in cocoa-producing regions—too much rain in Brazil and too little in West Africa—has limited production. Further, Europe and North America recently reported stronger demand for cocoa. In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America. Analysts have concluded that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the reasoning above?

A. Ground cocoa beans can be stored for long periods before they spoil.
B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.
C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.
D. Governments in Europe and North America are likely to change current restrictions on cocoa imports.
E. Historically, cocoa production has varied widely from year to year.

Kon'nichiwa​ Experts ,

AnthonyRitz BrightOutlookJenn

This question troubled me to an extend that yesterday night,I was making coffee in my dream. The coffee was yummmm.... :-P
OK , lets come back to reality.

The question asks us to strengthen the reasoning.
So , what is the reasoning ?

Current Supply Shortage + Increase in demand are driving cocoa prices updward -------->xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx------------->Analysts have concluded that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

We need to find x so that we can confidently say that the future cocoa prices will also continue to rise.

Lets talk about correct Answer choice C :-

It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.

According to me, there are many flaws in Option C :-

What if a large number of cacao trees were planted 5 years ago and still have not come online, but are scheduled to start bearing fruit starting in a few months/next year?

Option C make it sound as if cocoa trees that does not bear fruit this year wont bear fruit the next year either. This is not true. Next year it can all be back to normal ie weather conditions will be back to normal.

Also ,as if more trees would be the only possible solution to gain more beans. What if the disadvantageous weather stays? Then there is nothing that more trees can do about it.


Consequently , for option C to be correct we need to make many assumptions -

1/Unusually severe weather will not be back to normal next year.
2/Current cocoa trees are not enough to produce the required number of cocoa beans if weather conditions go back to normal.
3/No new cocoa trees , which were planted earlier, will start bearing fruit next year.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets talk about Option B -

In B, increased processing capabilities means more coca beans can be processed by the plants and hence plants will demand for more coca bean .

Since the current supply is low with already increased demand ~this additional improved processing capabilities will further increase the prices~

Please help to resolve my doubt.

Also, I could not understand the relevance of the below line. Is it just a fluff ?? Why the author has mentioned this line ?

In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America.


Arigato
User avatar
BrightOutlookJenn
Joined: 29 Dec 2013
Last visit: 30 Oct 2024
Posts: 106
Own Kudos:
465
 [8]
Given Kudos: 16
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V51
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V51
Posts: 106
Kudos: 465
 [8]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi PriyamRathor,

Thanks for the tag. I hope this answer can clear things up for you as this is a very common pattern in CR questions.

Whenever you get a CR question about economics, always break it down into Supply and Demand. This question predicts that cocoa prices will continue to rise. What has to be true for prices to rise? We need a mismatch between Supply and Demand - specifically, we need Demand to exceed Supply, so that the new equilibrium price will be higher.

So, what Evidence do we have about Supply and Demand? We have the backstory on Supply problems, and we have evidence for increasing Demand in the future.
You asked about this sentence: "In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America."
Why is that sentence there? It's not fluff. Fluff in CR questions is rare. The prompts are short and usually every piece of information is meaningful. If a sentence seems to be pointless in CR, I would highly suggest that you re-read it and see how it connects to the sentence before and/or sentence after. (That's an RC skill as well.)

Go ahead and re-read the prompt to see how that sentence connects to the sentences around it before you read the rest of my explanation ...

That sentence is evidence to supports the previous sentence about growing Demand in Europe and North America. (The big clue is that both Europe and North America are mentioned in both sentences.)

So we have information about the current mismatch between Supply and Demand, and information about the likely future of Demand (increasing). What is missing is information about the likely future of Supply. In quick-moving industries, what usually happens as soon as Demand increases? Supply will rise to meet it - and in that case, there may not be much of a price change. If we need to support the idea that prices will continue to rise, we need information that suggests Supply will not immediately increase in response to the Demand increase.

C is the only answer choice that does this. Structurally, it is exactly what we need - it suggests a reason that the industry can't rapidly react to this year's supply problems and massively increase supply next year. (Because in other industries, suppliers would massively increase their production as soon as possible, and prices would not dramatically increase.)

B is not the strongest choice because we already have data to support the idea that demand will continue to increase. We don't need more of that.

Again, this is a common pattern in CR questions that are based on economics, so it's a great concept to nail down as you learn from this question. It's worth your time to understand it.

Did this help? Please let us know.
User avatar
AvikSaha
Joined: 21 Jun 2021
Last visit: 07 May 2024
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 16
Kudos: 192
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Why B is not correct?
B is indicating towards increase in demand as the processing capacity increases...
So this will strengthen "Cocoa price will increase"

Also C gives a generic information that "It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit." which is true in present supply & demand scenario also.
How it can be correct?

Kindly let me know what I am missing here.
Thanks!
User avatar
MartyMurray
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 1,206
Own Kudos:
3,026
 [2]
Given Kudos: 106
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,206
Kudos: 3,026
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AvikSaha
Why B is not correct?
B is indicating towards increase in demand as the processing capacity increases...
So this will strengthen "Cocoa price will increase"

Also C gives a generic information that "It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit." which is true in present supply & demand scenario also.
How it can be correct?

Kindly let me know what I am missing here.
Thanks!
(B) is hard to eliminate because it does seem to indicate that there is a pathway for the demand to take up the supply and thus drive up the price. So, to end up choosing the credited choice we have to decide whether (B) or (C) is the better choice.

So, here's what I would do.

Looking at (C), we see that it indicates that increasing supply takes years. So, it confirms that increasing demand will likely continue to exceed supply and result in price increases "in the near future."

Then, going back to (B) to compare, we see that the passage says, "In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America." So, we already have processing increasing as a factor in the increase in price. So, we could see (B) as in a way just explaining how the processing has increased or showing another angle of the increase in processing.

Honestly, I wish the writer of this question had done something different with (B). It's a little too close to correct for me. Nevertheless, having seen that (C) for sure tends to confirm that supply won't likely increase in the near future and thus is a very good choice and that (B) could be seen as just explaining how processing of beans increased, as already mentioned in the passage, we can go with (C) and get this question correct.
User avatar
sahana01
Joined: 08 Sep 2023
Last visit: 16 Nov 2023
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 129
Posts: 2
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
What if better equipment increases demand even further as it can grind more cocoa, why is option B eliminated?
User avatar
MartyMurray
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 1,206
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 106
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,206
Kudos: 3,026
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sahana01
What if better equipment increases demand even further as it can grind more cocoa, why is option B eliminated?
This question is not written ideally since (B) could arguably be taken as providing additional support for the conclusion.

However, we can choose (C) over (B) because the passage already mentions that "In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America," which basically accounts for any change in demand resulting from an increase in processing capacity.

So, given that the passage says that, choice (B) does not add an additional factor that could drive demand since that factor has already been accounted for in another way.
User avatar
agrasan
Joined: 18 Jan 2024
Last visit: 26 Oct 2024
Posts: 39
Given Kudos: 1,203
Location: India
Posts: 39
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi experts @GMATNinja @KarishmaB @MartyTargetTestPrep

Can we say the following to eliminate B?
In the best case, the increased processing capacity will at best support to produce more supply for increased demand, hence, it does not support that prices will increase and does not strengthen the argument.
Please let me know if something is wrong with this thinking.
User avatar
agrasan
Joined: 18 Jan 2024
Last visit: 26 Oct 2024
Posts: 39
Given Kudos: 1,203
Location: India
Posts: 39
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
tyildirim92
MentorTutoring

Could you please give your reasoning to eliminate option B? It is in line with the prompt and indicates an increase in demand.

Regards.
Hello, tyildirim92. Thank you for being patient. I was busy when your request came through earlier, so I am just now getting to this. In fact, I had not worked with this question before, so I took it on in the moment, just before writing this post. The question took me 1:37 to answer correctly. My breakdown:

Bunuel
Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the reasoning above?
Okay, this is a basic strengthen question. To strengthen the argument or reasoning, we have to ensure that we grasp the reasoning itself. We can start by deconstructing the passage.

Bunuel
Supply shortages and signs of growing demand are driving cocoa prices upward. Unusually severe weather in cocoa-producing regions—too much rain in Brazil and too little in West Africa—has limited production. Further, Europe and North America recently reported stronger demand for cocoa. In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America. Analysts have concluded that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.
Sentence 1 provides two reasons that cocoa prices are increasing: supply shortages and signs of growing demand.

Sentence 2 ties into the first reason above, namely that severe weather... has limited production.

Sentence 3 focuses on the other reason for increasing cocoa prices: stronger demand for cocoa.

Sentence 4 provides an off-the-wall consideration: apparently, grinding of cocoa beans has increased in both Europe and North America.

Sentence 5 is the conclusion, placing analysts front and center, who predict that cocoa's price will continue to rise for the time being.

The conclusion seems fitting. Supply shortages + growing demand = rising prices. We are seeking to justify the rationale that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Bunuel
A. Ground cocoa beans can be stored for long periods before they spoil.
This information is loosely grounded (pardon the pun) in sentence 4. But this would present a problem. If ground cocoa beans could be stored for a long time, then perhaps the supply issue would be less of a concern. The passage seems to raise alarms at the prospect of demand increasing even as supply decreases, but a backup in stored ground cocoa beans might mitigate the issue. This is certainly not what we want in a strengthener.

Bunuel
B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.
Nothing about this new information reinforces the supply/demand equation above. What good is an improved processing capacity if there are no beans to process? Whether the manufacturers use the same old equipment or this new technology or technique, the concern remains, exactly as is. We need to look for information to bolster the notion that prices for cocoa products will, for the foreseeable future, continue to go up. In other words, we need a why behind the what, and this does not get us there. It merely offers another what.

Bunuel
C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.
An easy choice to write off if you have not practiced CR questions before, this one looks off-topic. But if current cacao trees (sorry, I am a purist when it comes to things chocolatey) are all tapped out and the industry might, in a panic, demand that more crops be planted to increase cacao yields, with this new information, we can appreciate how the issue of low supply and high demand leading to higher cocoa prices would most likely not be resolved in the near future. The current yield is not enough, that much is evident. Now we know that it is probably not going to be enough for the next few years. Provided demand for cocoa continues to rise, so, too, should the prices for cocoa products. There is nothing to find fault with in this one. This answer strengthens the reasoning of the analysts.

Bunuel
D. Governments in Europe and North America are likely to change current restrictions on cocoa imports.
The problem here is that we do not know which way the coin will fall, since we have no information on the current restrictions on cocoa imports. Thus, we can only speculate on the policy changes and their likely outcomes:

1) Governments relax restrictions (to allow more cocoa imports)—There is not enough supply, plain and simple. The problem is unresolved, but there is no reason to project that current conditions will necessarily hold into the future.

2) Governments increase restrictions (to allow fewer cocoa imports)—The supply still does not change, and now demand might increase even more. You know, forbidden fruit and all. We would then expect cocoa products to increase in price. However, we cannot deduce that this will be the line the governments pursue, or for how long the governments may keep such policies, so this outcome is uncertain.

We cannot use anything less than a probable outcome of a course of action to strengthen the reasoning of the analysts, so this answer choice, in its open-endedness, is out.

Bunuel
E. Historically, cocoa production has varied widely from year to year.
GMAC™ loves these sorts of historical precedent answers, but they are almost always incorrect, and usually for the same reason: What happened in the past may not necessarily happen in the future, and that is as far as we need to pursue this answer choice. That is, there is no compelling reason to believe that the current problem will necessarily persist for the next few years. This cannot be our strengthener.

I hope that helps. If you have further questions, you need only ask. Thank you for the mention.

- Andrew
­
Hi experts GMATNinja KarishmaB MartyTargetTestPrep

Can we say the following to eliminate B?
In the best case, the increased processing capacity will support to produce more supply for increased demand, hence, it does not support that prices will increase and does not strengthen the argument.
Please let me know if something is wrong with this thinking.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 7,108
Own Kudos:
65,554
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,853
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,108
Kudos: 65,554
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
agrasan
Hi experts @‌GMATNinja @karishmab @‌MartyTargetTestPrep

Can we say the following to eliminate B?

In the best case, the increased processing capacity will at best support to produce more supply for increased demand, hence, it does not support that prices will increase and does not strengthen the argument.

Please let me know if something is wrong with this thinking.
­That sounds right: an ability to meet demand doesn't necessarily imply an increase in price. In fact, INSUFFICIENT capacity might only exacerbate the existing supply shortages and further drive prices up.

(C) is a better choice, as explained here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/supply-short ... l#p3112782
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 15,420
Own Kudos:
69,198
 [3]
Given Kudos: 446
Location: Pune, India
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 15,420
Kudos: 69,198
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
Bunuel
Supply shortages and signs of growing demand are driving cocoa prices upward. Unusually severe weather in cocoa-producing regions—too much rain in Brazil and too little in West Africa—has limited production. Further, Europe and North America recently reported stronger demand for cocoa. In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America. Analysts have concluded that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the reasoning above?

A. Ground cocoa beans can be stored for long periods before they spoil.
B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.
C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.
D. Governments in Europe and North America are likely to change current restrictions on cocoa imports.
E. Historically, cocoa production has varied widely from year to year.


CR51141.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION
­
Responding to a pm:

Each word, especially of the conclusion and the question stem is important. 

There is a supply shortage in cocoa (beacause of some weather issues in cocoa producing areas - perhaps too much rain or too little destroyed trees)
But there are signs of growing demand (NA and Europe have reported higher demand and in the 1st quarter, grinding of cocoa has increased)
These factors together are raising the price of cocoa. 

Conclusion: Cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Currently because of supply shortage and growing demand, the prices are rising. But how do we support that they will continue to rise in the near future (let's say next 2-3 years too)?

How to choose between (B) and (C)

B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.

Well, it is expected. There are signs of growing demand and this is likely one of those. The manufacturers have increased capacity means they expect the demand to rise. Does it indicate that the demand will actually rise? No. This is one of the signs that are mentioned in the argument. What says that the demand will actually continue to rise in the near future? Nothing. 

C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.

This tells us that supply shortage will likely continue in the near future say next 2-3 years. Even if new trees are planted now to handle the supply shortage and rising demand, they will bear fruit in 5-6 years. So in 5-6 years, it is possible that the supply becomes abundant, but for now, we may have to deal with shortages. It shows that there is no quick fix for the shortages of supply. It will take time to fix. 
This directly addresses the "will continue to rise in the near future" part of the conclusion. 

Answer (C)
User avatar
Adarsh_24
Joined: 06 Jan 2024
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 179
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,168
Posts: 179
Kudos: 22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

Bunuel
Supply shortages and signs of growing demand are driving cocoa prices upward. Unusually severe weather in cocoa-producing regions—too much rain in Brazil and too little in West Africa—has limited production. Further, Europe and North America recently reported stronger demand for cocoa. In the first quarter, grinding of cocoa beans—the first stage in processing cocoa for chocolate—rose 8.1 percent in Europe and 16 percent in North America. Analysts have concluded that cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the reasoning above?

A. Ground cocoa beans can be stored for long periods before they spoil.
B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.
C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.
D. Governments in Europe and North America are likely to change current restrictions on cocoa imports.
E. Historically, cocoa production has varied widely from year to year.


CR51141.01
OG2020 NEW QUESTION
­
Responding to a pm:

Each word, especially of the conclusion and the question stem is important.

There is a supply shortage in cocoa (beacause of some weather issues in cocoa producing areas - perhaps too much rain or too little destroyed trees)
But there are signs of growing demand (NA and Europe have reported higher demand and in the 1st quarter, grinding of cocoa has increased)
These factors together are raising the price of cocoa.

Conclusion: Cocoa's price will continue to rise at least into the near future.

Currently because of supply shortage and growing demand, the prices are rising. But how do we support that they will continue to rise in the near future (let's say next 2-3 years too)?

How to choose between (B) and (C)

B. Several European and North American manufacturers that use cocoa have recently improved their processing capacity.

Well, it is expected. There are signs of growing demand and this is likely one of those. The manufacturers have increased capacity means they expect the demand to rise. Does it indicate that the demand will actually rise? No. This is one of the signs that are mentioned in the argument. What says that the demand will actually continue to rise in the near future? Nothing.

C. It takes new cocoa trees five or six years before they start bearing fruit.

This tells us that supply shortage will likely continue in the near future say next 2-3 years. Even if new trees are planted now to handle the supply shortage and rising demand, they will bear fruit in 5-6 years. So in 5-6 years, it is possible that the supply becomes abundant, but for now, we may have to deal with shortages. It shows that there is no quick fix for the shortages of supply. It will take time to fix.
This directly addresses the "will continue to rise in the near future" part of the conclusion.

Answer (C)

I was wondering why cocoa tree yield time would matter now. Since, this not a new information to the producers.
Your explanation that if they tried to spruce up the production right now after the demand increased makes perfect sense.

Thank you.
User avatar
satish_sahoo
Joined: 02 Jul 2023
Last visit: 31 Oct 2024
Posts: 89
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 138
Posts: 89
Kudos: 47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sneha333
D is also a strengthener.

If Govt. removes the restrictions on the imports that would further increase the demand for cocoa in Europe and North America.
Hi,

Replying to a very old post here. Since, this response has gotten some attraction and may help for future test takers who fell for D and wants to eliminate.

D is not a strengthener. It may look like one but it isn't.

Option D- Governments in Europe and North America are likely to change current restrictions on cocoa imports.

Change can be anything, may be the govt will enhance restriction, we don't know what change is. Hence, not a strengthener.

Hope it helps
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7108 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts