According to the most recent survey of our readers, nearly 70% of the

Good analysis and I will give it a 5+.

Could any of you please go through my essay too and let me know your comments:

A recently published article in the Homebuilder magazine concluded that the construction industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment because according to a survey, nearly 70% of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home over the next 2 years. This argument, however, is flawed, most notably because it fails to take into account that the people who wish to purchase a house are more likely to read the Homebuilder magazine, the real estate industry stocks are overpriced and already assume that the industry will experience unprecedented growth or the builders have a great inventory and they are trying to get rid of it by offering unprecedented discounts to buyers. Therefore, over the course of next five paragraphs, this essay will discuss that the argument is weak and provide several suggestions to strengthen the conclusion.

Most notably, the article assumes that the readers of the magazine are representative of population at large. This may not be the case however, as it is likely that the people who wish to purchase a house are more likely to read the Homebuilder magazine. Thus, the author must delve more into other similar surveys and show that this trend is indeed prevalent across industry and is not just limited to the readers of the magazine.

Another assumption that the author makes is that the growth projection is not already priced into the real estate industry. This may not be the case, as it could be that the real estate industry stocks are overpriced and already assume that the industry will experience unprecedented growth. Therefore, in order to strengthen the conclusion, the author must demonstrate that the real estate industry growth projection is not already factored in the stock price.

Still a third assumption that is made by the author is that the people who purchase a new home will not buy from the excess inventory at discounted prices. This may not be the case as it is possible that the builders have a great inventory and they are trying to get rid of it by offering unprecedented discounts to buyers. Therefore, to strengthen the argument, the author must provide a spilt between number of people who plan to build a home and those who plan to buy a home.

As discussed above, the article concludes that the construction industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment. This conclusion may not be true however, because it is possible that the people who wish to purchase a house are more likely to read the Homebuilder magazine, the real estate industry stocks are overpriced and already assume that the industry will experience unprecedented growth or the builders have a great inventory and they are trying to get rid of it by offering unprecedented discounts to buyers. Therefore, in order to strengthen the conclusion, the author must delve more into other similar surveys and show that this trend is indeed prevalent across industry and is not just limited to the readers of the magazine, demonstrate that the real estate industry growth projection is not already factored in the stock price and provide a split between number of people who plan to build a home and those who plan to buy a home.

Hi, please evaluate my essay!

The following appeared in The Homebuilder magazine, a local publication with a focus on construction and sale of real-estate properties:

“According to the most recent survey of our readers, nearly 70% of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home over the next 2 years. These results indicate that the growth in the construction industry is likely to accelerate in the near future. Therefore, this industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment.”

The argument claims that the the construction industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment. The conclusion is based on the premise that because nearly 70 percent of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home over the next 2 years, there is indication of growth in the industry. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and presents a distorted view of the situation. It also fails to consider several factors which need to be taken into account to evaluate the argument. Therefore, the argument is weak and unconvincing and falls apart at the seams.

First, the argument readily assumes that a survey in which 70% of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home is representative of the fact that such respondents will actually do the same. The statement is a stretch and fails to provide any conclusive supportive evidence. For instance, the respondents could have been planning to do the same over the last 5 years. The argument also fails to consider the number of people that did not respond to the survey. For example, if the survey was sent to 500 people, out of which only 50 responded, then even though 70% of those 50 plan to build or purchase a new home, what about the remaining 450 who did not respond.

Second, the argument claims that because of such a positive response, there is an indication that the construction industry is going to accelerate in the near future. Not only does the argument use vague words, such as "near future", which could mean anything from 6 months to 5 years, but it also does not demonstrate any correlation between the respondents of a survey of a local construction magazine and the construction industry. How can one local survey be an indication of an entire industry's future movement? If the argument had provided more detailed evidence regarding the number of people who took the survey, those who responded positively, any past surveys the magazine had undertaken to compare the results, the argument could have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the argument concludes by stating that the construction industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment. However, what is not clear here is how one can make such a conclusion from a premise that lacks any conclusive evidence or statement. Everything stated in the argument lies on an indication or a probability. For instance, the respondents 'indicated' that they are 'planning' to build or purchase a new house. We have no data about whether they actually will or not do the same in the future. For all you know, if in a year real estate prices rise due to inflation or because of any unforeseen circumstance, they will forego any such plans. Without any convincing answers, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In summary, the argument fails to convince because of the faulty assumptions aforementioned. Had the argument drawn upon the examples as suggested, and thereby plugged in the holes in the reasoning, it would have been far sounder on the whole.

Good Luck

Hi all!

Could anyone review my essay on this topic?

Many thanks in advance!

Prompt:

According to the most recent survey of our readers, nearly 70% of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home over the next 2 years. These results indicate that the growth in the construction industry is likely to accelerate in the near future. Therefore, this industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment

Essay:

The argument claims that the construction industry is likely to accelerate in the near future and offer lucrative investment opportunities based on the results of a survey in a construction and real estate magazine in which nearly 70% of the respondents indicated they were planning to build or purchase a new home. Stated in this way the author conveys a distorted view of the situation and reveals examples of leap of faith and poor reasoning. The argument fails to mention several relevant factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that the survey is representative and is correlated to the actual economic trend of the construction industry. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For example, the argument does not provide any information on the number of readers the magazine has nor the number of readers that answered the survey. Clearly, without further information on the survey, one is left with unanswered questions on whether the survey is representative of the population or not. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly provided further details on the survey and its background. Moreover, it would have helped to further validate the argument if the author explained the main factors that correlated the results of the survey with the economic trend in the construction industry.

Second, the argument claims that because the results of the survey indicate a growth in the construction industry, there are lucrative opportunities for investment. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between growth and profitability. To illustrate, the construction industry might be growing consistently but as competition is so fierce, profitability is only achieved by the most efficient companies. Therefore, it is not at all clear that there might be lucrative investment opportunities if no further information is provided on the industry itself. If the argument had provided evidence that the growth of the construction industry is also combined with profitable investment opportunities, then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the conclusion of the argument, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case, the background information of the survey and the magazine as well as the factors that can explain the correlation between the survey the economic trend in the construction industry. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Good Luck

Hi,

Can anyone rate my essay? Many thanks in advance!

Prompt:

According to a recent study, professional bodybuilders who used Train & Gain, a new protein supplement, over the course of three months experienced an increase in measured strength of up to 20%. Since Train & Gain is now available without prescription at all major pharmacies, superior results are no longer limited to professional athletes. Try Train & Gain today and you too can boost your strength and achieve professional-level performance in just a few months

Essay:

Based on a recent study, the argument claims that using a new protein supplement from Train & Gain can help increase the strength of its consumers. Stated in this way the argument manipulats facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The author fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which no evidence is provided. Therefore, the argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument assumes that the new protein is the main reason that professional bodybuilders in a study have gained strength over the course of three months as they were using the new supplement of Train & Gain. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For example, the bodybuilders might have changed its training plan and focused on strength gain during these months or they might be consuming other suplements that helped them to gain weight. Clearly, the argument intends to establish a causal correlation between the consumption of the new supplement and body strength gain, but without further information, this correlation is not supported in any way. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the key factors that explained this supposed correlation and helped understand how the supplement helped to the strength gain.

Second, the argument claims that since the supplement is now available without prescription, these gains in strength can be achieved by anyone. However, this is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not give any information on the conditions of consumption of the supplement, nor its side effects. To illustrate, if the new supplement was initially prescripted, it might have several side effects or the quantities to be consumed might be somehow controlled. However, without this prescription and with no further information, one is left with unaswered questions if there might be some negative effects if consumed incorrectly or if this supplement is ideal for all consumers. If the argument had provided evidence that the supplement does not bear any side effects and can be consumed freely at the discretion of the consumer then the argument could have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the argument based its conclusion on the results of a study. However, the argument does not give any additional information on this particular study that could help evaluate the consistency of this study. For instance, this study could have been performed only to specific athletes (top performers) or to a reduced number of athletes, whose results cannot be generalized to the entire population. Hence, without further information on the background of the study, the conclusion of the argument is left unsupported and is more of a wishful thinking.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed fore the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts that could help understand the correlation between the supplement and the body strenght. In order to assess the merits of the situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Good Luck

H!

Can anyone review my essay? Going for the GMAT tomorrow!

Many thanks in advance!

Prompt:

In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart’s Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960’s, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners ofthe new House of Beef across the street are millionaires.

Essay:


The argument claims that people are currently less concerned about their intake of red meat and cheese based on two reasons. First, a store that was focused on selling fruits and vegetables has started to sell cheese made of butterfat and second, the comparison between the modest life of the owners of a vegetarian cafe and the fact that the owners of the new House of Beef store are millionaires. Stated in this way, the author manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. It reveals examples of poor reasoning and fails to mention several factors in which the argument could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument is based on assumptions for which no supporting evidence is provided and is, therefore, weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that because the store that was selling organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's has included cheese, it is an indicative that, in general, people are less concerned about regulating its consumption of fatty cheese. This statement is a stretch and is not substantiated in any way. For example, the store might have included this type of product as an initiative to diversify its portfolio but the majority of its sales might still be vegetables and fruits. Clearly, it could be perfectly plausible that the majority of the store's customers are just buying the old products despite the introduction of the cheese products as customers going t this store is still concerned about its diet. The argument would have been more convincing if it explicitly stated the reasons after the inclusion of the cheese products of the store and the sales performance after the introduction of these products.

Second, the argument tries to draw a correlation between the wealth of the owners of two restaurants and the fact that people are less concerned in regulating the intake of red meat. However, this is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not provide any evidence to demonstrate such a correlation. To illustrate, the wealth of the owners does not explain at all if the sales performance of the restaurants are comparable. For instance, even when the owners of the vegetarian restaurant have a modest life, their restaurant might be more successful than the House of Beef but because the owners of the later restaurant opened other restaurants and had other business, they might be millionaries because not for the new restaurant but for other businesses. Moreover, the argument states that the restaurant is new, clearly conveying that it is improbable that the owners are millionaries due to the new restaurant. If the argment had provided further information regarding the sales performance of these two restaurants then the argument could have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the argument concludes that people are less interested in regulating its fatty cheese and red meat consumption based on features of three stores. However, it is not clear at all that focusing on the stores is the best way to understand the behavior of the general people. In fact, one should study the preferences of the general people as clearly, three stores are not representative of the general people consumption preferences. Therefore, one is left with unanswered questions that are relevant for which the conclusion of the argument could be evaluated.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed and unconvincing for the above mentioned reasons. It could be considerably strengthened if it mentioned all the relevant facts that could help evaluate the conclusion. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors, in this particular case the actual sales performance of the stores and the preferences of the consumers. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Good Luck

Can someone please review my essay?
Thanks in Advance !

The argument claims that as per a recent survey of the readers of magazine, 70 % of the respondents indicated that they are planning to build or purchase a new home over the next two years. The author thus concludes that the construction industry continues to offer lucrative opportunities for investment. He also further suggests that lucrative investment opportunities are the reason why people are planning to buy or build houses. The author also mentions that the results of survey also indicate growth in construction industry is likely to accelerate in the near future. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument readily assumes that majority of the respondents, who indicated that they are planning to build or purchase home, are doing so because they see purchase of home as an investment opportunity. This statement is a stretch as the author has failed to mention any correlation between the two factors. It is possible that respondents are currently living in a rented home which is why they would like to purchase or build home. It is also possible that they finance the purchase through a loan, in this case the action of purchasing or building home does not equate to an investment opportunity, it is rather a necessity for such people.

Second, the argument claims that the results of survey indicate that the growth in construction industry is likely to accelerate in the near future. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim, as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between survey results and growth in construction industry. The responses received in a survey does not directly translate to actual purchases. Also, the author has not provided any information regarding completed and ongoing construction projects, or any past projects. The argument could be further strengthened if the author had provided evidence to support his claim.

Finally, the author fails to mention answers to these questions. What if the construction industry has been dull since last few years, there are multiple vacant houses, building and apartments, then there will not be any immediate growth in the near future for the construction industry. Without convincing answers to the questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be strengthened if the author had provided relevant facts. In order to assess merit of a certain situation it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors. In this particular case , the author did not provide any relevant data for example the current growth rate, number of construction projects in pipeline, etc. Without this information, the argument is unsubstantiated and is open for debate.