None of these is a single-cell read; each needs a sum, a comparison of two orderings, or a product.
Statement 1: No. The two locations with the fewest seats are Pine (30) and Maple (35); their daily customers are 200 and 240, which sum to 440. Birch alone serves 360. Since 440 is more, not fewer, than 360, the statement is false. The pull is to assume the smallest cafes are also the quietest, so their combined traffic feels tiny, but two modest locations together out-draw the single busiest one.
Statement 2: Yes. By average spend the order is Oak, Maple, Elm, Pine, Birch; by seats the order is Oak, Birch, Elm, Maple, Pine. These are not the same order, since Maple is second in spend but fourth in seats, so the statement, which says they differ, is true. The trap is to check only the leader: Oak tops both lists, which can fool you into thinking the whole orderings coincide.
Statement 3: No. Daily revenue is customers times average spend: Elm 2,880, Oak 3,360, Pine 1,600, Birch 2,520, Maple 2,640. The highest is Oak, not Birch, so the statement is false. The bait is Birch's leading customer count of 360, but its low average spend of $7 pulls its revenue below Oak's, where fewer customers each spend $12.
The lesson: traffic alone does not decide revenue, and the leader of one ranking need not lead another. Correct answers: No / Yes / No.