In contrast to vertically integrated companies that control

[chitrangada.maitra]

In contrast to vertically integrated companies that control every step of the supply chain for a limited product line, producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways enables horizontally integrated companies to increase market coverage and control a larger segment of the industry.

producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways enables horizontally integrated companies to increase market coverage and control
producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways enables horizontally integrated companies to increase market coverage, controlling
the producing and marketing of one product in a variety of ways enables horizontally integrated companies to increase market coverage, controlling
horizontally integrated companies, by producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways, are able to increase market coverage and control
horizontally integrated companies, by producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways, are able to increase market coverage and controlled

OA: D

In option C, I understand that the "companies" are illogically contrasted with "the producing and marketing of one product." and that is incorrect.

But the explanation points out another error - "controlling" is not parallel with "to increase." In case of 'ing' modifiers, my understanding is if one of the following conditions are present, its use is acceptable

1) the "ing" action is SIMULTANEOUS with the main action;
2. the "ing" action is a DIRECT CONSEQUENCE of the main action.

In this case, 'controlling a large segment of the industry' is a direct action of 'producing and marketing one product in a variety of ways'

So, why is the use of 'controlling' incorrect?

Source: mgmat

[sudhanshu.jha03]

hey...it's a || issue...

just check in D...
"...........are able to increase market coverage and control....."

both verb are ||
we can avoid "to" before verb

E is not ||

Hope it helps!

[tim]

i'm not convinced of your rule #2; can you provide a source or an example of where rule #2 is applied correctly? it seems more likely that you have the cause and effect backwards, i.e. that the thing modified by the -ing word would need to be a direct consequence of the -ing word and not the other way around..