Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous

Question

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:  
 
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

sayan640 · Answer

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

Shwarma · Answer

A should be the answer
The proportion of travelers section will grow rapidly, thus doubling flights makes reasonable sense
Close call - C-> but it says, the price has risen modestly, Combating modest rise with 2X the flight number not reasonable, hence ruled out

Michelle777 · Answer

Why could A be the potential answer choice ??

Scholar94 · Answer

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.

Bunuel · Answer

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.

The correct answer is (A).

Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous

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 Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Through Topeka airport, consumer travel by plane is just voluminous

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