Does this sentence make sense?

It appears correct and I can understand it. I might include the word "units" after the 150,000 just for consistency in the implied comparison, but I don't think it's a necessity. Also I think the last reference to "year" should be plural because you are suggesting two different years.

For example, There will be an upward trend with yearly sales rising from just below 150,000 units in 2010 to 400,000 units in 2020, although a slight decrease is predicted to emerge in the years 2013 and 2018.

Yes, it is comprehensible. No, i don't see any mistakes in it. Some people might allege that it could be better composed, but i don't think it's that important.

Thank you for your pelies.
What about "There would be an upward trend ..."

Using "would" completely alters the meaning of the sentence, and makes it an incomplete sentence, as this sentence does not describe the condition necessary to account for the financial performance.

Is "There would be..." a kind of guess?

"Would" is conditional, it means that an event will only take place if a certain condition is fulfilled. Here's an example:

I would go to the party, if i knew that Beth will be there.

What that means is that i will only attend the party if i know that a condition will be fulfilled--in that example, the condition is that Beth will also attend.

Does that make sense to you?

There will/would be an upward trend with yearly sales rising from just below 150,000 in 2010 to 400,000 units in 2020, although a slight decrease is predicted to emerge in the year 2013 and 2018.



Using 'would' COULD alter the meaning of the sentence but it doesn't necessarily do so, Jinmin. It also can show what you've suggested, "a kind of guess", a greater doubt on the part of the speaker/writer.

Using 'would' could even be illustrating a deontic [social modal meaning]. By using a modal of greater doubt, would, the speaker/writer could just be showing a greater deference, allowing that his/her ideas are not the be all the end all.



Using 'would' does not make it an incomplete sentence. There is no need, NONE whatsoever, for the "condition" to be included in the same sentence.

Yes
Thank you, Setanta.

I think it is perfectly right. The only point why you may feel awkward about the sentence is perhaps the writer intends to express the accuracy of the figure.

"Would" is conditional, it means that an event will only take place if a certain condition is fulfilled. Here's an example:

Any modal verb can be used to express a conditional. A conditional is a conditional when it's a conditional and when it's not a conditional, it's not.

I would go to the party, if i knew that Beth will/would be there.

For those conditionals that do show greater doubt or contrary to fact,we tend to stay with the modals [would in bold, above] that exhibit a greater degree of "indefiniteness" [that's a mouthful!]

BUT, we don't have to.

Here's an example of will in a conditional.

I will go to the party, if I know that Beth will be there.

What that [with would] means is that i will only attend the party if i know that a condition will be fulfilled--in that example, the condition is that Beth will also attend.

The only difference between a will and a would is that by using would the speaker shows greater doubt OR, and this is important, greater reserve.

What this means is that the speaker could know full well that Beth will be there but for social [deontic] reasons, they choose to use make the statement a more obscure one.

It makes sense, but I would change "an upward trend with" to "an upward trend in". But that's just me. It makes sense either way.