Hi gullyboy09,Taking the example first. $9 to $9.50 is a 5.5% rise in cost, and yes, that is technically more than 5%. But the example was not making a claim about how big the cost increase is. The example was showing what a small cost does to a thin margin: profit falls from $1 to $0.50, a
50% drop for a 5.5% increase in cost. I.e. a small movement in cost, large movement in profit. That is the mechanism, and 5.5% would still be considered a slight rise by any ordinary reading of the word.
More importantly, that is not the comparison E is making. E does not compare the new breed's feed cost to the traditional breed's cost. It compares the feed cost to
the additional milk revenue the new breed generates over the traditional breed. The new breed gives twice the milk at the same price per litre, so that additional revenue equals the traditional breed's
entire per-goat revenue. A feed cost "slightly greater" than that (the additional revenue) wipes out all of the extra revenue and then cuts into the profit that would've been made with just traditional goats. Ultimately, per adult female goat per month, profit ends up lower. That is precisely the result the passage reports.
B moves the other way. Revenue
2R, minus 30% for the loan, leaves
1.4R, still above the traditional breed's
R. It cannot explain a drop of any size, substantial or otherwise.
On the AI point: we do use AI, and we use it for formatting. The reasoning in that post was worked out and typed by the person posting it, then run through AI to make it cleaner to read. It is read (by me, the poster) before it goes up.
If you would rather wait for
MartyMurray on this one, that is entirely fair and you are welcome to. The answer is
E, and I am confident his explanation will land in the same place.
gullyboy09
Hi
egmat, kindly request you to not reply to my queries. You use AI and doesn't even read it before posting. I wish someone can block you here.
In your own example, if $9 is cost for tradition, and 9.5 for new breed, its not slightly above, its more than 5%, not just slightly above.
In a mountainous region where small-scale dairy farming has been practiced for centuries, agricultural extension officers recently documented an unexpected pattern: farms that had adopted a newly introduced breed of goat—one capable of producing roughly twice as much milk per month as the traditional local breed—reported substantially lower net profits per adult female goat per month than farms that continued raising the traditional breed, despite selling their milk at identical per-liter prices.