Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Argument Analysis Please help to Evaluate [#permalink]
17 Aug 2010, 00:59
I am struggling with summary part.Please advise.
Argument: “Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Argument claims that processing cost goes down as organizations gain experience and learn how to do things more efficiently. Author gives the example of color film processing and claims that Olympic Foods will be able minimize the costs and it will result in more profits. Argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which argument can be evaluated. Argument relies on assumption, for which there is not clear evidence. Therefore, argument is rather weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
First of all, argument readily assumes that with experience organization learns how to do things better and they become more efficient. This results in reduction of processing costs. Author has made very generic statement here. Authors claim is stretch and not substantiated. Argument mentions the example of color film processing. Author mentions timeframe of 1970 to 1984. But it is very much likely that color film processing cost was very high in 1980 more than what it was on 1970 and then it went down in 1984 for some other reasons other than Authors suggestion of industry being more efficient. Can we be very sure that that cost decreased gradually and it was lowest in 1984 when we consider the timeframe of 1970 to 1984? No. Argument does not provide any evidence for its assumption.
Secondly, Author states that same principle of color film processing is applicable to Olympic Foods. Can we apply same principle to two industries of very different nature? Author does not provide any data to substantiate his claim about similarity between these 2 industries. These are two distinct industries with their own distinct nature and same principle / strategy will not work for both of them.
Finally, Argument concludes that, 25 years of experience will enable Olympic Foods to reduce the costs and maximize the profits. If the costs can be reduced at Olympic foods, is it not possible for the competitors of Olympic foods with same experience to do the same? There must be many other Food Companies with the same kind of experience. And if all these companies are able to reduce the costs, many of them might like to pass on the benefits of cost reduction to customer. In that case, Olympic Foods will loose the business to competitor companies and it may lead to reduction in profits. Author has failed to consider these possibilities.
In summary, argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerably strengthened, had the author addressed all the queries raised above. All the possibilities and key factors should be considered while making statement.
Re: Argument Analysis Please help to Evaluate [#permalink]
18 Aug 2010, 13:14
Saying .. "Finally, Argument" .. You shouldn't capitalize Argument.. and you also left out a massive amount of articles (a, an, the).. It should be 'the argument' or 'the author' in most of your sentences.
Re: Argument Analysis Please help to Evaluate
18 Aug 2010, 13:14