Dear Forum members,
Will appreciate if you can provide your feedback and rating for my 3rd AWA. This was the topic published in the GMAT prep test. My previous AWA can be seen at - please-rate-my-first-awa-165915.htmlplease-rate-my-2nd-awa-167236.html#p1329320
Following appeared in the article published in the newspaper.
“Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers - some say because its products lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine roar on the sound track.”
The article in local newspaper suggests that design of Motorcycle X has been copied by other manufacturer and is sold at lesser price. Even then, the sells of copied motorcycle is not as same as that of the Motorcycle X. The arguments provides reason for this conclusion at the same time provide alternate explanations that weakens that evidence.
Article states that sell of Motorcycle produced by foreign company that is priced cheaper than that of Motorcycle X is due to the noise produced by the copied motorcycle is not same as that of Motorcycle X. The argument doesn't provide any additional evidence to suggests that this is the only or the strongest reason for low sells. If the argument provided additional information in terms of customer surveys performed or technical tests performed on both vehicles to substantiate that noise was the reason for low sells then that would have strengthen the argument.
Article provides counter argument in stating that Motorcycle X does not use the noise of the bike as the highlight during the television advertisement. Though this reasoning does weaken the conclusion mentioned in the article but is unable to completetly refute it. As it may be possible that television ads would highlight features other than noise as in television ads the backgrond score is generally music or voice overs. Also, there could be other forms of promotions that may focus on this aspect. It's possible that Motorcycle X may be focussing on the noise as critical features in print advertisements, during the road shows, local expos, etc. Hence, it's likely that noise produced by Motorcycle X still could be the critical factors for its high sells compared to that of the foreign company's sells.
Article provides analogy between the car produced by foreign companies and the motorcycles produced by foreign companies in order to weaken the conclusion provided by the article. The counter argument provided is flawed as the analogy provided is not a valid comparision. It very likely that thrust or noise produced by the motorcycle could be the key factor in its success but for cars this could be completely opposite. Customer's may not like the cars that produce more noise and hence would not purchase them. Hence, it can be inferred that low noise produced by the car works to it's advantage but in case of motorcycles this could work to it's disadvantage.
Based on the information provided in the article it can be concluded that low sells of motorcycles produced by foreign company in comparison to that of Motorcycle X could be due to multiple factors and the evidences as well as counter-evidences mentioned in the artcile do not provide sufficient information to draw conclusion that would strengthen or weaken the argument.