The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing ope

Question

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West,  forming a new company for controlling  nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.

(A) forming a new company for controlling
(B) forming a new company that would control
(C) which would form a new company that controlled
(D) which formed a new company for controlling
(E) which formed a new company that would control

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/19/business/shell-texaco-to-merge-some-us-refining.html

The Shell Oil Company and Texaco Inc. announced yesterday that they had agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West,  forming a new company that would control  nearly 15 percent of the nation's gasoline sales.

anairamitch1804 · Accepted Answer

In this case, you must understand that C, D, and E cannot be the answers as the word 'which' cannot refer to a specific word as given in the sentence. The word "Which" intends to refer to the entire clause or to the merger (noun) ... but there is no noun to which the word 'which' can directly refer as 'merge' is a verb.

The second clause is a result of the first... in all cause-effect relationships, the GMAT prefers the -ING form of the verb after the comma for the effect part.

Also, this ING form is applicable when one of the following is correct:

The second action is a result / effect / offshoot of the first; … Cause and effect. 
The second action is a part of the first and not a separate action; 
The second action is dependent on the first; 
The second action is sub-ordinate to the first; 
The second action is embedded into the first action. 
The second action can’t happen without the first action independently 
The second action explanation (how / why the first action happens) of the first action … etc.

WE USE the second verb in the -ING form…

Also, A is wrong for the wrong idiom. Whenever we intend to denote the purpose, intention, desire etc., "to + verb" is considered idiomatically correct. So, A can be eliminated because it uses the wrong idiom 'for controlling'.

B is the best choice. In B, the use of the word 'would' is completely justified as it is used for a future event when viewed with respect to the past.

B: Correct

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West,  forming a new company for controlling  nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.

(A) forming a new company  for controlling 
(B)  forming a new company that would control 
(C)  which  would form a new company  that controlled 
(D)  which  formed a new company  for controlling 
(E)  which  formed a new company that would control

The relative pronoun “which” incorrectly refers to West.  Eliminate C, D, and E. 
 The present participle-forming modifies the preceding clause. The two oil companies have agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations- forming a new company. As the result is in the future, it is best to use -"that would control". Option B correctly conveys the meaning of the sentence.

VP

zoltan · Answer

B

Which is incorrect here and B is much better than A.

Answer is B

zoltan · Answer

Unfortunately, I cannot give exact grammatical explanation why A is incorrect. For me, B seems to be much better than A.

Can somebody give grammatical explanation?

May be, the meaning of the sentence is the key.

A says that forming a company because this new company has to control…. 
B says simple that because of the merger a new company was formed that would

bkk145 · Answer

To me, A has incorrect meaning. 
A says: The new company is made for controlling (it's sole purpose is to control) nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.
B says: The new company would control nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.

getafixdruid · Answer

B for me.

In A "controlling" seems to be the present participle, ie the present continuous form of control. This form does not go with the "to merge" in the main part of the sentence which indicates a future activity.

sondenso · Answer

Supprising! I got the point, Thanks bkk! OK, I discribe the poit I got here, if ot correct, pls modify it! "agreed to control" say something uncertain, so "would control" better than " for controlling". Pls comment! :lol:

tharunv · Answer

B is the right answer - which and that wouldn't go together - eliminates C and E - A is wrong. D is also wrong

noboru · Answer

"For controlling" is correct idiom?
For me, "To control" sounds much better.

Please clarify.

nusmavrik · Answer

Its between A and B.
comma + ing -----> modifies the previous clause

If you see B : "would" is correct. Since its a future past.

seekmba · Answer

'forming' is correct to modify previous clause.

the companies agreed to merge......we need future in past tense form.....hence would

Hence B.

onedayill · Answer

I'll go with B

A is good option but not better then B.

Its a 2008 post; so i doubt if some one has OA?

kissthegmat · Answer

B. forming a new company that would control

is correct.

ray3232 · Answer

Which= Red Flag

Whenever 'Which' is used after a comma, it always modifies the noun before the comma.
Therefore in the question 'Which' is modifying 'West'.

C,D and E are out.

'Forming' i.e is a offshoot of their agreement to merge. So an 'ING' verb is required.

Between A and B
From past we are going to the present, so we need to used 'would'.
The correct answer is B.

Hope it helps.
Ray

sairam595 · Answer

Can someone explain why option 'A' is incorrect.

Also in option B i thought 'would' is incorrect since the event is not about "future in the past."

Please advise where i am going wrong

Divyadisha · Answer

Hi! There,

Here are my 2 cents.

Two companies have agreed to do something. This function that they have agreed on is in the future and hypothetical. This is the reason 'B' is correct over 'A'

Secondly, I think that instead of 'for', 'to' must have been used as the intention of two companies will be shown by use of 'to'

Any thoughts?

thangvietnam · Answer

"controling" in choice A means that some other agent , not the new company , will perform the controling. this is not logical. the two companies do not make a new company for someone/something else to control.

thangvietnam · Answer

in choice A, "for controlling" dose not refer to subject of "forming", the two companies. "controling"here refer to general action not belonging to any noun in the sentence. So, "controlling" has not agent whick do "controlling". So, meaning is unclear and not logic

choice B show clearly that the new company do controlling. this is logic

LoneSurvivor · Answer

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West , forming a new company for controlling  nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.

A. forming a new company for controlling

For controlling is not idiomatic

B. forming a new company that would control
correct

C. which would form a new company that controlled
which can not modify the whole preceding clause

D. which formed a new company for controlling
which can not modify the whole preceding clause

E. which formed a new company that would control
which can not modify the whole preceding clause

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing ope

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

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing ope

Prep Toolkit

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