Last visit was: 21 May 2024, 14:20 It is currently 21 May 2024, 14:20
Toolkit
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

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.

# Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93373
Own Kudos [?]: 625613 [1]
Given Kudos: 81918
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2015
Posts: 728
Own Kudos [?]: 333 [2]
Given Kudos: 476
Manager
Joined: 10 Sep 2023
Posts: 52
Own Kudos [?]: 42 [1]
Given Kudos: 52
Intern
Joined: 02 Jan 2024
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 14
Re: Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous [#permalink]
Why could A be the potential answer choice ??
Intern
Joined: 16 Feb 2021
Posts: 19
Own Kudos [?]: 12 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous [#permalink]
sayan640 wrote:
A should be the answer. If the people in the prime traveling age becomes the rapidly growing proportion of the population then that explains the investors' prediction to make huge profits.
Other options are irrelevant.

Posted from my mobile device

E justified the prediction. From the argument, the writer already mentioned that the population is stable and much increase is not expected. A however says otherwise. And from my knowledge of GMAT, every statement in an argument is assumed to be true. Hence yhe option does not provide additional informal to justify the prediction.

And in my opinion, E provides another possibility that can guarantee modest profit for both the existing planes and the new ones to be established.
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93373
Own Kudos [?]: 625613 [0]
Given Kudos: 81918
Re: Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous [#permalink]
Bunuel wrote:
­Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous enough for the commercial airlines to make modest profits. The size of the city's population is stable and is not expected to increase much. Yet there are investors ready to double the number of flights to and from the airport within ten years, and they are predicting solid profits both for themselves and for the established airlines.

Which of the following about the city of Topeka, if true, most helps to provide a justification for the investors' prediction?

A. Over the next ten years, people in their middle-aged years, the prime traveling age, will be a rapidly growing proportion of the city's population.

B. As distinct from the existing flights, most of the flights being planned would be run at "very early" morning times, in hopes of stimulating interest in those schedules.

C. Spending on train and bus travel to and from Topeka has been increasing modestly each year for the past ten years.

D. The average number of seats per flight is lower among existing routes than it is among routes still in the planning stages.

E. The sale of snacks and drinks in-flight accounts for a steadily growing share of most airlines' proﬁts.

­
This is a CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

­

­

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

Reading the question: If the Subscription Plan question was fresh in your mind, you might have noticed in your approach to this question that it presents something similar: a plan, or what we could call an argument about the future. And the prompt, though not rich with argument, does contain the opinion of the investors. However, our filter below will end up closer to that for an "explain" question. Don't let that bother you: questions frequently can be categorized in one or more ways. After all, there aren't official categorizations to these questions.

Creating a filter: the critical detail here is that we are expecting the airport traffic to grow even though the city population will not increase. For example, tourism to the city might be expected to grow. That way, the population doesn't grow, but flights grow. That's the key detail: we need a situation in which 1) we do not require the population of the city does not grow and 2) the traffic through the airport will increase. As in an explain question, the correct answer should address both.

Applying the filter: choice (A) matches our filter; since, 1) the number of people is not increasing, but 2) the travel per person is increasing. Choice (B) misses the target; even if the airport stimulated interest in early morning flights, would people necessarily fly more overall, or just shift their flight preferences? Choice (C) doesn't connect to 1) or 2). Choice (D) is tempting. If flights in the future have more seats, they might be more profitable. But this explanation fails to connect both 1) and 2): if the population isn't growing, why should double the number of flights be profitable? Choice (E) is also out, as it also fails to explain how we can profitably double flights. We're left with (A).

Logical proof: we can apply the negation test to choice (A). If the percentage of the population of prime traveling age went down in the future, we would have a good reason to doubt the plan. Choice (A), indeed, is material to the argument.