To determine which statement does not appear to be true, let's evaluate each option based on the characteristics of exponential growth, which is often observed in franchises like the one Sebastian owns.
A. The sub shop had 50 locations by the end of 2010.
- This could be plausible depending on how the graph starts and the specified initial conditions. If the y-intercept of the function is 50 when x = 0 (the year 2010), then this statement is true.
B. The company opened 15 stores in the first year.
- In the context of exponential growth, the number of stores added does not remain constant. Instead, it typically grows by a percentage. Therefore, this statement could be misleading if interpreted literally, as the initial increase would relate to the percentage increase rather than a flat number like 15.
C. Every year the number of stores opened increased by 30%.
- This statement aligns with the nature of exponential growth, where growth is often characterized by a percentage increase year over year.
D. Since 2010, the company opened 30 stores a year.
- If the number of stores opened increases exponentially, this statement would not be true since it implies a constant increase rather than a percentage increase.
Based on this analysis, the statement that does not appear to be true is D. Since 2010, the company opened 30 stores a year. This statement suggests a fixed number of stores opened, which contradicts the exponential model indicated in the context of the question.