BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

knewton rc 1

Expert replies
by pradeepkaushal9518 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 9:37 pm
plz eplain yr answers


Question #1

Mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. food industry have provoked controversy for many years. Critics are concerned that mergers, by reducing the numbers of firms and increasing industry concentration, make it easier for firms to increase output prices and lower wages and input prices. Others argue that mergers and acquisitions (M&As) increase efficiencies and boost productivity by allowing companies to lower costs and provide consumers with goods at lower prices.

Until 1977, consolidation was not much of an issue for most food industries. At that time, the average four-firm concentration ratios (the percentage of the industry that is controlled by the top four firms) for eight food industries-meatpacking, meat processing, poultry slaughter and processing, cheese making, fluid milk processing, flour milling, feed processing, and oilseed crushing (soybean, cottonseed, and corn)-were about 31 percent. A wave of mergers and acquisitions led to a jump in average concentration to about 44 percent by 1992. Were these M&As efficient, and did acquired companies increase their productivity after being acquired?

Labor productivity, or output per worker, is one measure of production efficiency. Using U.S. Census Bureau plant-level data to examine processing plants in the eight food industries, researchers found that the processing plants were highly productive before being acquired and they significantly improved their labor productivity afterward. The five major food industries-meat processing, dairy (which includes both milk and cheese) and grain processing (which includes flour milling and feed processing)-doubled their output per worker, and two other industries realized at least 50-percent increases in output per worker over 1972-92. Only one of the eight industries, poultry slaughter and processing, failed to increase output per worker, and it experienced a vast increase in the processing of value-added products as plants switched from producing whole birds to producing poultry parts. The analysis suggests that mergers and acquisitions contributed to the general improvement in labor productivity.

Which of the following can logically be inferred from the information given in the third paragraph?


(A) The cheese making industry did not see a sizable increase in worker productivity between 1972 and 1992.

(B) There were many more workers hired for the meat processing, dairy and grain processing industries than for any other sector.

(C) The oilseed crushing industry saw at least a 50% rise in labor productivity between 1972 and 1992.

(D) Many poultry workers were laid off from their work due to the increase in processing of value-added products.

(E) Processing plants in 1992 were likely to have the same equipment, training and worker safety laws as they did in 1972.
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Join the discussion
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

by niksworth » Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:27 am
C should be correct.

It is mentioned in the last paragraph that -

The five major food industries-meat processing, dairy (which includes both milk and cheese) and grain processing (which includes flour milling and feed processing)-doubled their output per worker, and two other industries realized at least 50-percent increases in output per worker over 1972-92. Only one of the eight industries, poultry slaughter and processing, failed to increase output per worker

So, 5 industries increased productivity by 200% and 2 industries by at least 50%. Since poultry slaughter and processing is the 8th industry, oilseed crushing should be one of the seven. Thus, oilseed crushing industry saw a rise in labor productivity by at least 50%.
Join the discussion

by shibal » Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:33 am
niksworth wrote:C should be correct.

It is mentioned in the last paragraph that -

The five major food industries-meat processing, dairy (which includes both milk and cheese) and grain processing (which includes flour milling and feed processing)-doubled their output per worker, and two other industries realized at least 50-percent increases in output per worker over 1972-92. Only one of the eight industries, poultry slaughter and processing, failed to increase output per worker

So, 5 industries increased productivity by 200% and 2 industries by at least 50%. Since poultry slaughter and processing is the 8th industry, oilseed crushing should be one of the seven. Thus, oilseed crushing industry saw a rise in labor productivity by at least 50%.
same reasoning and answer...
Join the discussion