Background: In a certain state, over 80% of the land is comprised of farms, but historically, large farm machinery has not sold well in this state.
Premise: The percentage of land devoted to farms is not expected to increase. In fact, the number of farms in the state has been slowly declining over the past decade.
Premise: A new manufacturer of large farm equipment is building a factory in the middle of this state, and the manufacturer's plans for success depend on strong in-state sales of their product.
Conclusion: The manufacturer and the industry analysts are expecting this manufacturer to be quite successful over the next few years.
The answer needs to explain the contrast b/w the manufacturer and the industry analysts expectation and the historical trend and should emphasise of the market shift in demand. hence, A explains it well.
B- Incorrect, different context.
C- Incorrect- what is does is kind of weaken the claim. if the import is increased for food, the need for farming may decrease proportionally.
D- Incorrect - brings in new information about models of equipments. from the argument we cant assume if the lack of variety in model can explain the past trend.
E- incorrect- The subsidies might help farmers economically, but if those farmers are smaller operations or are declining in number, it doesn’t resolve the fundamental concern about machinery sales.