. The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and m

Question

The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company for controlling nearly fifteen of the nation’s gasoline sales.
A. forming a new company for controlling
B. forming a new company that would control
C. which would form a new company that controlled
D. which formed a new company for controlling
E. which formed a new company that would control

my doubt: i am somehow not able to justify the usage of "would" in option B ."would" is used in two circumstances
1)to describe some hypothetical situation such as --> if i had one million, I would .....
2)to describe an even that was still a future event at the time described in the sentence but is no longer a future event
for instance ----> last year,people predicted that germany would win the world cup.

the "would" of B gives me a notion that all this controlling has been achieved and that someone is speaking this sentence after 20 years of that merger!!
also "for controlling" seems much better because at least it is giving a purpose of that merger
how do i reconcile this ?
thanks and regards

theCodeToGMAT · Answer

There's a slight difference in the meaning of {A} & {B}

{A} gives the meaning that merging was intended so as to control nearly 15 nation's sales.
{B} gives the scenario of cause-effect.

Since the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}

What is the OA?

aditya8062 · Answer

Since the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B}

well both A and B are adverbial
also the merger can be done with some intention
the OA is B but honestly i am not able to justify the usage of "would" in B, as mentioned above

theCodeToGMAT · Answer

aditya8062 wrote:Since the construct is adverbial, I will go with {B} well both A and B are adverbial also the merger can be done with some intention the OA is B but honestly i am not able to justify the usage of "would" in B, as mentioned above Yep, both are written in Adverbial form; however, first gives a meaning that controlling was motive but second gives that in cause-effect form.. But yeah, "would" usage is kindda confusing! What's the source?

GMATGuruNY · Answer

aditya8062 wrote:The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company for controlling nearly fifteen percent of the nation’s gasoline sales.
A. forming a new company for controlling
B. forming a new company that would control
C. which would form a new company that controlled
D. which formed a new company for controlling
E. which formed a new company that would control

my doubt: i am somehow not able to justify the usage of "would" in option B ."would" is used in two circumstances
1)to describe some hypothetical situation such as --> if i had one million, I would .....
2)to describe an even that was still a future event at the time described in the sentence but is no longer a future event
for instance ----> last year,people predicted that germany would win the world cup.

the "would" of B gives me a notion that all this controlling has been achieved and that someone is speaking this sentence after 20 years of that merger!!
also "for controlling" seems much better because at least it is giving a purpose of that merger
how do i reconcile this ?
thanks and regards

One purpose of would is to express the FUTURE-IN-THE-PAST: an action expected to take place AFTER ANOTHER PAST ACTION.
The two oil companies AGREED to merge their refining and marketing operations in the Midwest and the West, forming a new company that WOULD CONTROL nearly fifteen percent of the nation’s gasoline sales.
Here, after the companies AGREED TO MERGE (in the past), the new company WOULD CONTROL (sometime AFTER the agreement) nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
This meaning is perfectly logical:
If -- prior to the agreement -- one company controlled about 10% of the market, while the other company controlled about 5% of the market, then the merger of the two companies WOULD CONTROL nearly 15% of the market.

A: a new company for controlling nearly fifteen percent of the nation’s gasoline sales.
Here, for controlling serves as an adjective describing a new company.
What TYPE of new company?
A new company FOR CONTROLLING nearly fifteen percent of the nation's gasoline sales.
The implication is that 15% of the nation's gasoline sales NEEDED TO BE CONTROLLED.
Not the intended meaning.

Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Choose how you want to prepare

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

. The two oil companies agreed to merge their refining and m

Chicago Booth

GMAT Course Reviews

Admissions Consulting Reviews

FREE GMAT PREP RESOURCES

GMAT PREP DEAL TRACKER