Here is the question:



When we approach a "Most Useful to Know in Order to Evaluate" question such as this we can begin as we would for any strengthen or weaken question. That is, we need to identify the conclusion and the evidence and even perhaps look for any gap in logic that we might find.

The conclusion is "As a result, the retail price of chocolate is certain to increase within six months." And the evidence is "The wholesale price of cacao solids and cocoa butter has increased significantly and is unlikely to fall in the foreseeable future."

So what is being indicated in this argument is that "Because the wholesale price of cacao beans is up then the retail price of chocolate will soon increase."

Now if we quickly think about this several possible gaps in this logic emerge: several reasons why the increase in the wholesale price of cacao beans may not increase the retail price of chocolate.

1) The chocolate maker might absorb the costs. The wholesale price can go up temporarily and if the manufacturer expects it to go back done soon that company may decide not to pass on the increase to the consumer in the form of the retail price.

2) The chocolate maker may have a stockpile of cacao. This is less likely with a food commodity as opposed to more durable goods like cars or appliances, but it may be the case that the manufacturers have more than a six month supply of cacao and are therefore relatively insulated from this year's poor harvest.

3) Other costs associated with the production of chocolate may go down. For example, labor costs, energy costs, or the cost of other ingredients may decrease and offset the increase in the cost of beans.


You do not have to come up with these specific gaps in logic. All that you need to do is to understand that the thing that could weaken this argument is that something might come between the increase in the wholesale price of one component of chocolate and the retail price of the chocolate. Any answer choice that would help you to know if this increase will be passed on to consumers or not passed on is what is most useful to know in order to evaluate.

That is why we have answer choice C here. If we know whether the price of other ingredients has decreased we will know about 1 of the possible factors involving this retail price increase. Clearly if the price of other ingredients has decreased then the overall ingredient cost may stay the same even though cacao beans are more expensive. In this case the retail price might not go up.

If the price of the other ingredients has not decreased then it is more likely that the increase in the cost of cacao beans will be passed on the to the consumer.

Other answers: Choice B is an interesting answer. If consumers are not willing to pay more than the price increase might not work out. However, if the cost of materials is up the manufacturer may have no choice but to increase the retail price of chocolate anyway.

Choices A and D are just unnecessary facts. It does not matter what happened in the past nor what percentage of trees are impacted. Those things come BEFORE an increase in the cost of cacao beans and that increase has already occurred.

Choice E is important. If the fungus cannot be eliminated quickly there will surely eventually be a price increase. But over the time frame mentioned in this question - the next six months - it appears that the yearly harvest is already in and it was a bad harvest. So Choice E is not as relevant as C.

Hope it helps!