Alpacas' fleece is worth surprisingly little compared to their market value; a top breeding specimen bringing upwards of $100,000 even if five pounds of fleece fetches only $80 to $240.

a Alpacas' fleece is worth surprisingly little compared to their market value; a top breeding specimen bringing upwards of $100,000 even if five pounds of fleece fetches

b Alpacas' fleece is worth surprisingly little in comparison with its market value; a top breeding specimen bringing upwards of $100,000 while five pounds of fleece fetches

c The fleece of the alpaca is worth surprisingly little compared to its market value, while a top breeding specimen can bring upwards of $100,000 even though five pounds of fleece fetch

d The fleece of the alpaca is worth surprisingly little compared to the animal's market value; a top breeding specimen can bring upwards of $100,000 while five pounds of fleece fetch

e The worth of the alpaca's fleece is surprisingly little compared to the animal's market value; a top breeding specimen can bring upwards of $100,000 even though five pounds of fleece fetches

The original sentence contains several errors. First, the pronoun "their" logically refers to alpacas; however, since the word alpacas' is in possessive form, it is an awkward antecedent for any pronoun (although it is technically legal to refer to a possessive noun with a possessive pronoun such as "their"). Second, the singular verb "fetches" is paired with the plural noun phrase "five pounds of fleece." Third, the use of the semicolon is improper. A semicolon can correctly be used to separate two independent clauses (subject + verb). Here, however, what follows the semicolon is not a clause since it can not stand alone as a sentence.

The correct answer is D.

Can you please go into detail about plural noun phrases? How they differ from subject phrases (singular)? How to identify them?

PS Thanks for the great responses to my other questions.

As you mentioned few errors in the explanation, I'll cover those and try to explain: -

1) verb fetches doesn't agree with the subject 'five pounds' (ignore 'of fleece' - a middleman) So A, B & E are out.

Between C & D - In C 'its' in to its market value - doesn't have clear antecedent. In D the animal's market value corrects the error. Also while is preffered over 'even though'

aaa, the issue in this question does not concernplural or singular noun phrases; instead, this question concern noun-pronoun agreement and clarity of meaning.

It is nonsensical to thing that fleece itself could be worth less than its market value, since market value determines an item's worth. Rather, the sentence is attempting to say that the fleece of the alpaca is worth surprisingly less than the animal's market value.

Let's look at the answer choices:
A: the pronoun their has no plural antecedent, and the meaning is not clear (see above); additionally, the plural subject pounds does not agree with the singular verb fetches
B: The pronoun its incorrectly refers to fleece; additionally, the plural subject pounds does not agree with the singular verb fetches
C: The pronoun its nonsensically refers to fleece; logically, its must refer to the animal.
D: CORRECT. The comparison is market value of fleece to market value of the animal
E: The plural subject pounds does not agree with the singular verb fetches

Hope that helps
-dan

isnt the possessive 'their' properly referring to the possessive 'Alpacas' ' in A?

their market value --> 'Alpacas' market value?

Joe's mom calls him a pig (wrong)
Joe's mom came to his room (correct)

Thanks.

yeah, that's totally correct.
i'm not sure why the original poster claimed any awkwardness in using a possessive pronoun to refer to a possessive noun; this is done all the time, with no awkwardness whatsoever.

if you have a possessive pronoun, it can have either a possessive or a nominative (normal form) antecedent. for some reason, though, the gmat follows the 'rule' (in quotation marks because it's not really a rule, at least according to the vast majority of arbiters of english usage) that a nominative pronoun can't have a possessive antecedent. (as stated in a few other places on this forum, though, that rule really isn't worth paying much attention to; so far it has been the deciding basis for a grand total of 0 official problems that we know about)