Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 05:04

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Please Rate my AOA!

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 17

Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink] New post 21 May 2011, 20:10
KUDOS will be given to a well articulated, constructed criticism.

I should also mention that any critique will receive one back in kind.

Thanks in advance!

==============================================================================



The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper.”

AOA:

The argument claims that The Mercury should reduce the price below its competitor, the Bugle, in order to increase readership. It also claims that due to the speculated increased circulation, the Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This argument has many flaws and uses poor reasoning to justify such a drastic business decision. The Mercury fails to consider the quality and relevancy of the articles, competing sources of news, and the decision making process of the average newspaper buyer.

First, there is no mention in the argument as to the comparative quality and relevancy of the two paper's articles. This demonstrates that the Mercury staff may not grasp what the target population is looking for in terms of content, or what the average population is concerned with. For example, The San Jose Mercury News is a paper based in San Jose, California, the heart of silicon valley. The newspaper is aware that many of its readers want to see tech-related content, so that is what they focus on. The Mercury in this example has given no indication that they have understood what the target audience would like to read about. Clearly this is an area in which additional due diligence should be performed before arbitrarily changing the purchase price in hopes of increased readership.

Second, the argument assumes that there are no other sources of competition. Today, there are many sources to obtain news information from such as: the internet, twitter, blogs, television, etc. The argument does not consider that in the five year decline of 10,000 readers, some of those readers may have switched their primary sources of news to one of the examples listed above. The argument assumes that the only sources of news are either The Mercury or The Bugle. This is not realistic and fails to considers shifting consumer behavior based on evolving media types.
Finally, the argument dangerously assumes that the average consumer bases his or her purchase of a newspaper based on price alone. This is a large leap of faith that does not consider the fact that there are many consumers who pay a premium for premium quality reporting. Some examples of this may include the Wall Street Journal, a high quality, finance oriented paper, CNN and MSNBC, premium news stations available with the purchase of a cable package, and The Economist, a magazine publication dedicated to quality reporting on global economic issues. As many of the listed examples have a purchase price higher than "free", we see that consumers are willing to pay for quality journalism. To assume that price is the only factor in deciding purchase is flawed.

Finally, the argument dangerously assumes that the average consumer bases his or her purchase of a newspaper based on price alone. This is a large leap of faith that does not consider the fact that there are many consumers who pay a premium for premium quality reporting. Some examples of this may include the Wall Street Journal, a high quality, finance oriented paper, CNN and MSNBC, premium news stations available with the purchase of a cable package, and The Economist, a magazine publication dedicated to quality reporting on global economic issues. As many of the listed examples have a purchase price higher than "free", we see that consumers are willing to pay for quality journalism. To assume that price is the only factor in deciding purchase is flawed.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It may warrant additional consideration if the author had a well articulated argument based on data and facts. Without this information, the argument is unsubstantiated and weak.
Kaplan GMAT Prep Discount CodesKnewton GMAT Discount CodesManhattan GMAT Discount Codes
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
Posts: 453
Location: United States (DC)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.37
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 5

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink] New post 29 May 2011, 09:42
I think it looks pretty good, the obvious exception is that you have the 'Finally' paragraph in there twice. Obvious mistakes like that could mean a significant difference in score.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 17

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink] New post 29 May 2011, 11:25
hah! so it is. dang. it was not like that in the original version - I guess I had copy and paste issues from the MGMAT to here. But yes, I would agree, it is a *tad* redundant :D
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 17

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink] New post 03 Jun 2011, 19:24
Hey all,

Full Debrief to anyone interested:
full-debrief-580-to-690-q48-v37-5month-retake-114597.html

haven't received officials AWA, but will update when I get it in a few days
Re: Please Rate my AOA!   [#permalink] 03 Jun 2011, 19:24
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Please review my AOA essay and give feedback, many thanks! fch76 0 28 Nov 2011, 13:51
Please rate my AOA dips 2 18 Jun 2011, 00:16
Rate my AOA please aries422 1 12 Jun 2011, 03:40
rate my essay AOA vivekcall81 0 13 May 2011, 07:36
AOI & AOA - Please Rate ravitej85 0 15 Oct 2009, 03:05
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Please Rate my AOA!

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.