A. Has the price of cocoa solids and cocoa butter remained steady during other periods of poor harvest?
What it asks
Past patterns of cocoa prices during poor harvests.
If YES
Prices stayed steady before → maybe they won’t rise now.
If NO
Prices rose before → supports current rise.
Why it’s weak
🚨 Argument already tells us prices have increased now.
Past patterns don’t affect:
👉 whether retail prices will rise in 6 months.
Verdict: Not central → eliminate.
B. Are consumers willing to spend more for chocolate?
What it asks
Demand elasticity.
If YES
Retailers can raise prices → strengthens.
If NO
Retailers may absorb costs → weakens.
Why it’s tempting
Tests ability to pass cost to consumers.
Why it’s not best
Even if consumers resist:
costs still increased
firms often raise prices anyway
demand affects quantity, not necessarily price.
Verdict: Relevant but secondary.
C. Have the prices of other ingredients in chocolate decreased recently?
What it asks
Net production cost change.
Chocolate cost = cocoa + sugar + milk + etc.
If YES
Other costs ↓ → total cost may stay same → price may not rise.
If NO
Total cost ↑ → price rise more likely.
🚨 Directly tests whether retail price pressure exists.
Verdict: BEST evaluate option.
D. What percentage of cacao trees in Brazil were affected by the fungus?
What it asks
Severity of damage.
Why it’s irrelevant
We already know:
👉 harvest was unusually meager
👉 prices increased
Percentage adds no new insight.
Verdict: Irrelevant.
E. Can the fungus be eliminated within the next six months?
What it asks
Future recovery.
Why it’s weak
Even if eliminated:
supply recovery takes time
price increase predicted within 6 months
Does not affect near-term retail pricing.
Verdict: Weak.