Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 14:16 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 14:16
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
655-705 Level|   Non-Math Related|                  
User avatar
guddo
Joined: 25 May 2021
Last visit: 30 Oct 2025
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
8,660
 [186]
Given Kudos: 19
Posts: 360
Kudos: 8,660
 [186]
16
Kudos
Add Kudos
169
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,289
Own Kudos:
49,290
 [15]
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,289
Kudos: 49,290
 [15]
11
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,980
 [9]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,265
Kudos: 76,980
 [9]
9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Apt0810
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Last visit: 24 Oct 2020
Posts: 327
Own Kudos:
622
 [3]
Given Kudos: 94
Posts: 327
Kudos: 622
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
1)A)Yes,since coffee production per capita is 4.5 which is highest among all countries and it is also mentioned in the First graph that Brazil's coffee production was higher than that of Central America,which is already on the right most end of x-axis of the graph
B)No,this cannot be said since the consumption might be from domestic or imports from other countries.
C)Yes,since India produces more coffee than China and also the bubble size is greater for India than for China so the mentioned statement is correct


2)D, Since from 1988 to 1989 the monthly income Increased and also the per consumption Increased,so the last statement mentioned in the discussion that only increase without promotion is not sufficient is wrong and it needs simplification.

3)a)Yes,since there is a statement made in the discussion that "A Brazilian institutional investment valued at US$25 million in 10 years brought about an increase in yearly coffee sales worth 40 times as much",so here the 10 years period starts from 1993 since the data is talking about the 2003 values
b)Yes,since Brazil's monthly income started falling from 1999 and the per capita consumption Increased but the overall consumption in 2003 was Highest in Brazil and it was lower in other countries so most of the countries might have felt the recession
c)No,since condition of other countries is not known so we cannot comment on the global per capita rate of production

Posted from my mobile device
avatar
akshaygup
Joined: 09 Sep 2014
Last visit: 07 Jun 2024
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
3
 [1]
Given Kudos: 45
Location: India
GMAT 1: 660 Q44 V38
GPA: 3.7
Products:
GMAT 1: 660 Q44 V38
Posts: 10
Kudos: 3
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can you explain the answer for 2 again-
in Graph 2 I see a fall in income from 1998 to 1999 - and an increase in consumption: What am I missing
User avatar
BLTN
Joined: 25 Aug 2020
Last visit: 19 Dec 2022
Posts: 242
Own Kudos:
255
 [3]
Given Kudos: 216
Posts: 242
Kudos: 255
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
akshaygup
Can you explain the answer for 2 again-
in Graph 2 I see a fall in income from 1998 to 1999 - and an increase in consumption: What am I missing

There are two cues for you,
First, the question is not provided option that you are alluded.
Second, pursuant to the last assertion,
Actually, for the 20 years up to 2003 in Brazil, it was only during the period 1993 to 1998 that coffee consumption increased as income was increasing.

There is a period when the trends of both curves coincide.
Thus, to rebut the argument, you ought to find a period out of mentioned diapason.
Whereas your option is crossed one of the borders - 1998.

Hope it helps.
User avatar
Will2020
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 24 Jan 2017
Last visit: 04 Mar 2022
Posts: 135
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,120
Location: Brazil
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE:Consulting (Healthcare/Pharmaceuticals)
Products:
Posts: 135
Kudos: 51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB



Note the question stem of question 3: Assuming each of the following statements is true, select Yes if the statement helps explain trends shown in the second graph in a way that is consistent with information in the passage.

The given statement needs to be taken to be true. We need to select 'Yes' if the statement helps explain the trend we see in graph 2 (regarding production & consumption in Brazil)

Given Statement 2: Worldwide demand for coffee began to fall in 1999, resulting in economic recessions in most coffee producing countries.

Brazil is a coffee producing country. We see that 1999 onwards, its monthly income is falling (the line graph shows monthly income). Recession can explain the downward trend in the monthly income. Hence, this statement does explain the trend. "YES"

Given Statement 3: The trend in per capita consumption of coffee in Brazil between 1986 and 2003 is indicative of the trend in the global per capita rate of production.
Graph 2 gives us the trend in per capita consumption of coffee in Brazil between 1986 and 2003 (the bar graph) but we are not given the trend in global production. This statement does not explain graph 2. Graph 2 does not give us global per capita rate of production.
Hence, "NO".

Will2020

Hi KarishmaB! Regarding Statement 2, I understand that Brazil could have faced an "economic recession", but how can I infer that OTHER countries were facing economic recession as well?

Thank you for your explanation and your kindness! :please:
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,980
 [6]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,265
Kudos: 76,980
 [6]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Will2020


Hi KarishmaB! Regarding Statement 2, I understand that Brazil could have faced an "economic recession", but how can I infer that OTHER countries were facing economic recession as well?

Thank you for your explanation and your kindness! :please:

The statement is given to be true. Read the question stem again: Assuming each of the following statements is true, select Yes if the statement helps explain trends in the graph...

We don't have to explain the statement. It is what we know. Knowing this, we have to see if it explains the trend in the graph. If we know that recession had hit coffee producing countries, and we know that Brazil is a coffee producing country, then we can say that recession might have hit Brazil. Then the graph can be explained because the graph shows decreasing income.
We are given the generic statement and are asked to explain the graph of Brazil based on that.
User avatar
JoeAa
Joined: 09 Aug 2020
Last visit: 08 Apr 2024
Posts: 40
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 40
Kudos: 18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
can someone explain why Q2 isn't 1994-1996?
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 11,238
Own Kudos:
43,696
 [1]
Given Kudos: 335
Status:Math and DI Expert
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, General Management
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Posts: 11,238
Kudos: 43,696
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
JoeAa
can someone explain why Q2 isn't 1994-1996?


The statement states that it was only during 1993-1998 period that both income and consumption increased. We have to find a timeperiod other than this that too follows the same relation.

1994-1996 is already a part of the period 1993-1998, and does not question the statement.
Only in 1987-1988, the increase in consumption is related to increase in income.
All other options either fall in 1993-1998 period or do not follow the directly proportional relation. for example 1998-2003 has income decreasing and per capita consumption increasing, thus agreeing to the statement.
User avatar
pyroabhi
Joined: 25 May 2021
Last visit: 24 Jun 2025
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 311
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, Economics
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GPA: 3.94
Products:
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
Posts: 28
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

Mam,
I have a doubt in Q2 of this MSR.
Initially my understanding of “oversimplification” was that “It is not true”.
However, I figured that it actually means ” to not provide a complete picture or all the factors affecting the issue ” .
Even, then I am not convinced how we arrived at the answer as mentioned there.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,980
 [3]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,265
Kudos: 76,980
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
'Simplification' means that some details have been glossed over.  'Oversimplification' means the some details have been glossed over, which should have been taken into account. This much simplification was uncalled for and perhaps made the statement incorrect.

Statement:
Actually, for the 20 years up to 2003 in Brazil, it was only during the period 1993 to 1998 that coffee consumption increased as income was increasing.

In second graph, we see that 1988 to 1989 too monthly income increases and coffee consumption increases too. That is why the statement becomes incorrect. 
pyroabhi
KarishmaB

Mam,
I have a doubt in Q2 of this MSR.
Initially my understanding of “oversimplification” was that “It is not true”.
However, I figured that it actually means ” to not provide a complete picture or all the factors affecting the issue ” .
Even, then I am not convinced how we arrived at the answer as mentioned there.
­­
User avatar
Dbrunik
Joined: 13 Apr 2024
Last visit: 01 Nov 2025
Posts: 270
Own Kudos:
124
 [1]
Given Kudos: 267
Location: United States (MN)
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT Focus 1: 625 Q84 V82 DI77
GMAT Focus 1: 625 Q84 V82 DI77
Posts: 270
Kudos: 124
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
What in the world is the explanation for this third question? It seems to be affirming that the answer should be yes when indeed it should be no for the reason that in the Grass they give you no information on per capita job growth or job growth in any way Just overall in income, which also says nothing about wage rates. It’s possible that they’re making more by working more at lower wages, not necessarily higher wages

For this reason, this official question is poorly written, or at least the answer explanation and should be revised
Attachments

IMG_0174.png
IMG_0174.png [ 341.69 KiB | Viewed 2371 times ]

User avatar
Confusion
Joined: 16 Sep 2024
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 37
Posts: 24
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
But the consumption post 1999 has increased per-capita - and when we talk about recession it says demand decreases. how does both logically follow?
KarishmaB



Note the question stem of question 3: Assuming each of the following statements is true, select Yes if the statement helps explain trends shown in the second graph in a way that is consistent with information in the passage.

The given statement needs to be taken to be true. We need to select 'Yes' if the statement helps explain the trend we see in graph 2 (regarding production & consumption in Brazil)

Given Statement 2: Worldwide demand for coffee began to fall in 1999, resulting in economic recessions in most coffee producing countries.

Brazil is a coffee producing country. We see that 1999 onwards, its monthly income is falling (the line graph shows monthly income). Recession can explain the downward trend in the monthly income. Hence, this statement does explain the trend. "YES"

Given Statement 3: The trend in per capita consumption of coffee in Brazil between 1986 and 2003 is indicative of the trend in the global per capita rate of production.
Graph 2 gives us the trend in per capita consumption of coffee in Brazil between 1986 and 2003 (the bar graph) but we are not given the trend in global production. This statement does not explain graph 2. Graph 2 does not give us global per capita rate of production.
Hence, "NO".

Will2020
User avatar
cheshire
User avatar
DI Forum Moderator
Joined: 26 Jun 2025
Last visit: 18 Sep 2025
Posts: 271
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 271
Kudos: 256
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I agree with you on this, all the explanations just say "they sold less coffee so they went into a recession and made less money" even though the graph clearly shows an increase in coffee sales. While a decrease in sales would explain a economic recession, the reasoning behind said recession is directly conflicted with our given data.
Confusion
But the consumption post 1999 has increased per-capita - and when we talk about recession it says demand decreases. how does both logically follow?
avatar
quialias
Joined: 01 Sep 2025
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 18
Posts: 14
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In 3rd question, you have assumed few things , statements like "If Brazil's institutional investment program began in 1993" and "could help explain this trend", clearly states the same, in GMAT I believe we should answer based on facts not on assumptions if not explicitly mentioned. Please clarify.
Sajjad1994
Official Explanation

1. For each of the following statements, select Yes if, based on the information provided in the passage or the first graph or both, the statement would have been true in 2003. Otherwise, select No.

The first graph indicates that it includes, for each major coffee-producing country other than Brazil, the amount of coffee produced by the country in 2003 and the per capita amount of coffee consumed by the country. The line at the top of the graph indicates that Brazil's per-capita coffee consumption in 2003 is 4.5 kg per year, greater than that of each of the other countries in the graph. The text accompanying the graph indicates that Brazil's coffee production exceeds that of Central America. The graph indicates that each of the major coffee-producing countries in 2003 produced less than the combined production of the countries of Central America. Therefore, each of the major coffee-producing countries produced less coffee in 2003 than did Brazil.

The correct answer is Yes.

While both the discussion and the first graph pertain to coffee consumption among those living in coffee-producing countries, neither suggests that this consumption comes entirely from coffee produced in that country.

The correct answer is No.

In the first graph, the roughly equal sizes of the bubbles representing India and China show that in 2003 those countries were roughly equal in population. And the bubbles' very low positions in the graph show that consumers in both countries consumed comparatively little coffee per capita. But the bubbles' positions along the horizontal axis show that in 2003 India produced about 5 million 60 kg bags of coffee, whereas China produced less than 500,000 60 kg bags of coffee. Much more coffee was domestically produced in India than in China, though the two countries were similarly large in population and low in per-capita coffee consumption; thus it appears that increasing consumption of domestically produced coffee had greater potential in India than in China to boost world coffee demand.

The correct answer is Yes.

2. Which one of the following data ranges in the second graph most clearly indicates that the final sentence of the Discussion tab involves oversimplification?

The Discussion tab's final sentence says "for the 20 years up to 2003 in Brazil, it was only during the period 1993 to 1998 that coffee consumption increased as income was increasing." If this sentence involves oversimplification, there must have been some period outside the years 1993 to 1998 during which both coffee consumption and income were increasing in Brazil. In the second graph, such simultaneous increases would be represented by both the blue bars and the black line increasing in height from left to right in a section of the graph representing some years before 1993 or after 1998. And indeed there is exactly one such section, representing the years 1988 and 1989, in which the blue bars and the black line both increase in height from left to right. So the data shown in the graph for the period 1988 to 1989 indicate that the Discussion tab's final sentence involves oversimplification.

The correct answer is D.

3. Assuming each of the following statements is true, select Yes if the statement helps explain trends shown in the second graph in a way that is consistent with information in the passage. Otherwise, select No.

The discussion indicates that the Brazilian institutional investment to develop domestic coffee consumption yielded a large increase in coffee sales over ten years. The second graph shows that Brazil's per capita coffee consumption increased steadily from 1995 through 2001 after several years of relative stability in the early 1990s. If Brazil's institutional investment program began in 1993, it could help explain that steady increase in per capita consumption from 1995 through 2001.

The correct answer is Yes.

The second graph shows that Brazil's per-capita monthly income fell significantly from 2000 to 2003. Since the passage indicates that Brazil was a major coffee-producing country, an economic recession resulting from a decline in worldwide demand for coffee beginning in 1999 could help explain this trend.

The correct answer is Yes.

If the statement is taken as an explanation of Brazil's increase in per-capita coffee consumption, it would conflict with the information in the passage indicating that the increase in consumption was due to institutional investment. If it is merely taken as a description of how Brazil's increase in per-capita coffee consumption coincided with the global per-capita rate of coffee production, it would have no explanatory value.

The correct answer is No.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,062
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
quialias
In 3rd question, you have assumed few things , statements like "If Brazil's institutional investment program began in 1993" and "could help explain this trend", clearly states the same, in GMAT I believe we should answer based on facts not on assumptions if not explicitly mentioned. Please clarify.


In Q3 the stem itself says: assuming each statement is true, select Yes if it helps explain the second graph and stays consistent with the passage. So we must treat every option as a hypothetical premise. Saying “If ...” and “could help explain” is exactly what the question asks us to test. It is not adding extra assumptions.

• Brazil’s 10-year program to promote domestic coffee consumption through institutional investment began in 1993.

If the program began in 1993, it directly explains the sustained rise in consumption from the mid 1990s onward, including years when income declines. It shows why consumption grows despite weaker income.

Answer: Yes.

• Worldwide demand for coffee began to fall in 1999, resulting in economic recessions in most coffee producing countries.

A global demand drop lowers world prices and export revenue in producing countries. In the graph, Brazil’s income peaks in the late 1990s and then falls from 1999 to 2003. That matches the statement and explains the decline in the black income line.

Answer: Yes.

• The trend in per capita consumption of coffee in Brazil between 1986 and 2003 is indicative of the trend in the global per capita rate of production.

Graph 2 shows only Brazil’s per capita consumption and per capita income. The statement is about global per capita production, which is not in the graph. It also gives no reason for why Brazil’s consumption rises in the mid 1990s or why income falls after the late 1990s. So it does not explain any trend in the graph.

Answer: No.
Moderators:
Math Expert
105355 posts
496 posts