Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 02:14 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 02:14
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3 
User avatar
Himan2209
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2022
Last visit: 01 Sep 2022
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 10
Kudos: 2
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 29 Jul 2022, 05:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Sajjad1994,

Please help in evaluating my AWA:

The argument claims that reduction in circulation of The Mercury can be attributed to competition from low-priced Newspaper, The Bugle and reduction in price by The Mercury should help gain back the circulation numbers to former levels. It claims that more circulation will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the Mercury. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument remains weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument claims that over five years, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10000 readers, as a result of availability of the low-competing newspaper, The Bugle in the market. This argument is a stretch as it attributes this number to a single reason and avoid evaluation of certain other reasons. For example, there will definitely be addition of new readers over 5 years and rather than seeing reduction in numbers, it should be seen as a percentage reduction over the reading population. Clearly, the argument avoids the explanation of certain evaluation worthy factors. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that circulation count reduction of The Mercury can just be because of cost as a factor.

Secondly, the argument claims that reduction of the price of The Mercury below that of The Bugle will result in increase in circulation of it. and eventually will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in The Mercury. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument doesn’t demonstrate any correlation between price and circulation. To illustrate, there can be few interesting segments in The Bugel that can attract readers as a differentiator from The Mercury. While, cost can be one of the factors, it can’t be just one reason and will not surely help to increase circulation to the levels that can attract readers and more businesses. If the argument had provided evidence that reader circulation will increase on price reduction to a good extent the the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the approach to measure circulation in absolute numbers and not exploring other reasons that can lead to number reduction are certain doubts implanted in the argument. There can be different indices to measure circulation rather than absolute numbers to compare circulation, which should be explored. Also, cost is the only factor that is something to be established. Without a convincing answer to these doubts, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

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 such as proper indices to measure circulation and all preferences of the reader while picking the newspaper. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 30 Jul 2022, 00:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
On which prompt this essay is based?

Himan2209
Hi Sajjad1994,

Please help in evaluating my AWA:

The argument claims that reduction in circulation of The Mercury can be attributed to competition from low-priced Newspaper, The Bugle and reduction in price by The Mercury should help gain back the circulation numbers to former levels. It claims that more circulation will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the Mercury. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument remains weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument claims that over five years, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10000 readers, as a result of availability of the low-competing newspaper, The Bugle in the market. This argument is a stretch as it attributes this number to a single reason and avoid evaluation of certain other reasons. For example, there will definitely be addition of new readers over 5 years and rather than seeing reduction in numbers, it should be seen as a percentage reduction over the reading population. Clearly, the argument avoids the explanation of certain evaluation worthy factors. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that circulation count reduction of The Mercury can just be because of cost as a factor.

Secondly, the argument claims that reduction of the price of The Mercury below that of The Bugle will result in increase in circulation of it. and eventually will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in The Mercury. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument doesn’t demonstrate any correlation between price and circulation. To illustrate, there can be few interesting segments in The Bugel that can attract readers as a differentiator from The Mercury. While, cost can be one of the factors, it can’t be just one reason and will not surely help to increase circulation to the levels that can attract readers and more businesses. If the argument had provided evidence that reader circulation will increase on price reduction to a good extent the the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the approach to measure circulation in absolute numbers and not exploring other reasons that can lead to number reduction are certain doubts implanted in the argument. There can be different indices to measure circulation rather than absolute numbers to compare circulation, which should be explored. Also, cost is the only factor that is something to be established. Without a convincing answer to these doubts, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

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 such as proper indices to measure circulation and all preferences of the reader while picking the newspaper. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Show more
User avatar
Himan2209
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jul 2022
Last visit: 01 Sep 2022
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 10
Kudos: 2
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 30 Jul 2022, 03:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sajjad1994, On this question:

Argument:
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.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 30 Jul 2022, 08:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

Himan2209
Hi Sajjad1994,

Please help in evaluating my AWA:

The argument claims that reduction in circulation of The Mercury can be attributed to competition from low-priced Newspaper, The Bugle and reduction in price by The Mercury should help gain back the circulation numbers to former levels. It claims that more circulation will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the Mercury. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument remains weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument claims that over five years, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10000 readers, as a result of availability of the low-competing newspaper, The Bugle in the market. This argument is a stretch as it attributes this number to a single reason and avoid evaluation of certain other reasons. For example, there will definitely be addition of new readers over 5 years and rather than seeing reduction in numbers, it should be seen as a percentage reduction over the reading population. Clearly, the argument avoids the explanation of certain evaluation worthy factors. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that circulation count reduction of The Mercury can just be because of cost as a factor.

Secondly, the argument claims that reduction of the price of The Mercury below that of The Bugle will result in increase in circulation of it. and eventually will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in The Mercury. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument doesn’t demonstrate any correlation between price and circulation. To illustrate, there can be few interesting segments in The Bugel that can attract readers as a differentiator from The Mercury. While, cost can be one of the factors, it can’t be just one reason and will not surely help to increase circulation to the levels that can attract readers and more businesses. If the argument had provided evidence that reader circulation will increase on price reduction to a good extent the the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the approach to measure circulation in absolute numbers and not exploring other reasons that can lead to number reduction are certain doubts implanted in the argument. There can be different indices to measure circulation rather than absolute numbers to compare circulation, which should be explored. Also, cost is the only factor that is something to be established. Without a convincing answer to these doubts, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

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 such as proper indices to measure circulation and all preferences of the reader while picking the newspaper. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Show more
User avatar
yipmewmew
User avatar
Joined: 26 May 2021
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 230
Own Kudos:
83
Given Kudos: 792
Location: India
Schools: Ross '26 (D)
GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V33
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Ross '26 (D)
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Posts: 230
Kudos: 83
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 19 Oct 2022, 07:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Sajjad1994, bb
Going to write the Gmat in 5 days, pls evaluate my first AWA.

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.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.


The argument states that ever since the circulation of a rival newspaper started five years ago, The Mercury has gone down in circulation by 10000 readers and suggests that the Mercury should reduce its price lower than that of the Bugle to increase its reach. Stated this way, the argument reveals examples of leap of faith and poor reasoning. It also clearly makes an assumption for which no evidence has been provided. Several key factors basis which this argument could have been fairly evaluated have not been mentioned by the argument, making it a flawed and unconvincing one.

Firstly, the argument readily assumes that price is the most important factor which the readers look at when making a choice between two rival newspapers. The argument gives no supporting evidence for this claim. It even fails to mention whether the price of the Bugle was lower or higher to begin with. This fact is very important for the reader to know as it helps to assess the validity of the argument that price is a deciding factor. If the Bugle was sold at a higher price since the beginning, then how is it the case that the Bugle managed to snatch away readers from the Mercury? The argument would fall apart in such a case . The author could have strengthened their argument by telling us about the starting price points of both the newspapers.

Second, the argument insinuates that the Mercury can keep its prices low until the circulation increases and raise them thereafter. But never mentions what would be the cost of such a move to the Mercury. While lower prices might increase readership in the short run, what if this model is unsustainable in the long run and hence cannot be the best solution as stated by the author? It also does not answer the question that what should be the way forward if once the readership has increased through lower prices? If the argument had provided evidence that the Mercury was in a position to drive out its competition through lower prices, it would have clearly been more convincing.

Third, the argument never looks at alternate reasons for why the readership for the Mercury is down in the last five years. Has there been a changes in the management at the Mercury? Had the Bugle poached the best writers from the Mercury when it started? Had the readership of the Mercury already been on a declining trend and the Bugle was never the reason in the first place ?Or is it that the readers have become jaded with the pieces being written in the Mercury?
Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim made by the author is more of wishful thinking rather than well though out reasoning.

In conclusion, the argument is deeply flawed for the above mentioned reasons. The holes in the argument are many in number and massive in size. Both the facts and the contributing factors are missing from this argument, leading to the reader not being able to assess the merits and demerits of this argument.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 20 Oct 2022, 03:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AWA Score: 5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 3.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

sv2023
Hi Sajjad1994, bb
Going to write the Gmat in 5 days, pls evaluate my first AWA.

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.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.


The argument states that ever since the circulation of a rival newspaper started five years ago, The Mercury has gone down in circulation by 10000 readers and suggests that the Mercury should reduce its price lower than that of the Bugle to increase its reach. Stated this way, the argument reveals examples of leap of faith and poor reasoning. It also clearly makes an assumption for which no evidence has been provided. Several key factors basis which this argument could have been fairly evaluated have not been mentioned by the argument, making it a flawed and unconvincing one.

Firstly, the argument readily assumes that price is the most important factor which the readers look at when making a choice between two rival newspapers. The argument gives no supporting evidence for this claim. It even fails to mention whether the price of the Bugle was lower or higher to begin with. This fact is very important for the reader to know as it helps to assess the validity of the argument that price is a deciding factor. If the Bugle was sold at a higher price since the beginning, then how is it the case that the Bugle managed to snatch away readers from the Mercury? The argument would fall apart in such a case . The author could have strengthened their argument by telling us about the starting price points of both the newspapers.

Second, the argument insinuates that the Mercury can keep its prices low until the circulation increases and raise them thereafter. But never mentions what would be the cost of such a move to the Mercury. While lower prices might increase readership in the short run, what if this model is unsustainable in the long run and hence cannot be the best solution as stated by the author? It also does not answer the question that what should be the way forward if once the readership has increased through lower prices? If the argument had provided evidence that the Mercury was in a position to drive out its competition through lower prices, it would have clearly been more convincing.

Third, the argument never looks at alternate reasons for why the readership for the Mercury is down in the last five years. Has there been a changes in the management at the Mercury? Had the Bugle poached the best writers from the Mercury when it started? Had the readership of the Mercury already been on a declining trend and the Bugle was never the reason in the first place ?Or is it that the readers have become jaded with the pieces being written in the Mercury?
Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim made by the author is more of wishful thinking rather than well though out reasoning.

In conclusion, the argument is deeply flawed for the above mentioned reasons. The holes in the argument are many in number and massive in size. Both the facts and the contributing factors are missing from this argument, leading to the reader not being able to assess the merits and demerits of this argument.
Show more
User avatar
muskannn1
User avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2022
Last visit: 14 Dec 2022
Posts: 4
Given Kudos: 11
Location: India
Posts: 4
Kudos: 0
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 23 Nov 2022, 11:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Response Essay:

In an announcement issued by the publisher, he states that the circulation of 'The Mercury', a weekly newspaper, has declined because of a lower-priced competing newspaper, 'The Bugle'. He also suggests that the best way to improve circulation and bring it to the former levels is to reduce the price of the newspaper, and as a result attract more advertisers. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, that could call the conclusion to question. Also, the conclusion relies on unstated assumptions and unsupported claims for which no clear evidence exists. The argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and falls apart at the seams.

First, the author assumes that the reason behind the decline in the readership and circulation is solely because of the lower price of The Bugle. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. There are numerous possible factors that could have contributed to the decline in the circulation of The Mercury. For instance, low demand, irrelevant content, poor paper quality, impact on the audience, poor quality of the articles, etc. Another possible explanation is the change in the marketplace. People now prefer to watch news online or from other internet sources rather than in paper form. The author fails to clarify how the low price of The Bugle led to the decline in the circulation of The Mercury. The argument would have been a lot more convincing if the author had provided evidence that how a lower-priced newspaper caused a fall in the readership of another newspaper.

Second, the author claims that by reducing the price below that of The bugle, The Mercury will be able to increase its circulation and readership to former levels. This is a very weak and unsupported claim as the author does not provide any correlation between the price and the increased circulation.
It is based on the premise that the author assumes that the success of the Bugle is only because of its low price. It might be the case that The Bugle's success is because of its high-value content, latest and updated news, high paper quality, etc. In fact, lowering the price of the newspaper will have many negative effects. Also, the author does not provide any statistical data to show by what percentage The Mercury will be able to increase its profits and circulation after reducing its price. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

Finally, the argument concludes that the increased circulation will attract more businesses into buying advertising space in the newspaper. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim. Advertisers prefer to advertise or promote their business in newspapers with a wider reach, a wider audience, and a good customer base, and not necessarily the newspapers with increased circulation. Moreover, the author does not provide any information as to how the increase in circulation will attract more advertisers. As a result, this conclusion has no legs to stand on.

In summary, the argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing due to the aforementioned faulty assumptions. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unconvincing and open to debate.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 24 Nov 2022, 12:16
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AWA Score: 5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 3.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

muskannn1
Response Essay:

In an announcement issued by the publisher, he states that the circulation of 'The Mercury', a weekly newspaper, has declined because of a lower-priced competing newspaper, 'The Bugle'. He also suggests that the best way to improve circulation and bring it to the former levels is to reduce the price of the newspaper, and as a result attract more advertisers. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, that could call the conclusion to question. Also, the conclusion relies on unstated assumptions and unsupported claims for which no clear evidence exists. The argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and falls apart at the seams.

First, the author assumes that the reason behind the decline in the readership and circulation is solely because of the lower price of The Bugle. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. There are numerous possible factors that could have contributed to the decline in the circulation of The Mercury. For instance, low demand, irrelevant content, poor paper quality, impact on the audience, poor quality of the articles, etc. Another possible explanation is the change in the marketplace. People now prefer to watch news online or from other internet sources rather than in paper form. The author fails to clarify how the low price of The Bugle led to the decline in the circulation of The Mercury. The argument would have been a lot more convincing if the author had provided evidence that how a lower-priced newspaper caused a fall in the readership of another newspaper.

Second, the author claims that by reducing the price below that of The bugle, The Mercury will be able to increase its circulation and readership to former levels. This is a very weak and unsupported claim as the author does not provide any correlation between the price and the increased circulation.
It is based on the premise that the author assumes that the success of the Bugle is only because of its low price. It might be the case that The Bugle's success is because of its high-value content, latest and updated news, high paper quality, etc. In fact, lowering the price of the newspaper will have many negative effects. Also, the author does not provide any statistical data to show by what percentage The Mercury will be able to increase its profits and circulation after reducing its price. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

Finally, the argument concludes that the increased circulation will attract more businesses into buying advertising space in the newspaper. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim. Advertisers prefer to advertise or promote their business in newspapers with a wider reach, a wider audience, and a good customer base, and not necessarily the newspapers with increased circulation. Moreover, the author does not provide any information as to how the increase in circulation will attract more advertisers. As a result, this conclusion has no legs to stand on.

In summary, the argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing due to the aforementioned faulty assumptions. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unconvincing and open to debate.
Show more
User avatar
GreyRift
User avatar
Joined: 02 Feb 2022
Last visit: 12 Oct 2023
Posts: 4
Given Kudos: 1
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4
Kudos: 0
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 11 Oct 2023, 01:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hey there,

I have been working on my AWA skills. So far I have been receiving super good feedback from the forum but I am still not where I would like to be.
Could you please provide feedback on my AWA below.

Response Essay:


The announcement talks about how a competing lower priced newspaper, The Bugle, is lowering the number of readers of one newspaper, The Mercury.
It states that since, the Bugle has started the amount of readers has declined by 10,000 readers. The argument fails to take several other potential causes into account and falls victim to some logical flaws such as but not limited to, comparing apples to oranges and making broad assumptions.

First, the article assumes that the reduced number of readers of mainly due to the competing newspaper the Bugle. This might not neccesarily be the case as there are other market variables, which could cause the number of readers to dwindle. If for example the entire industry has moved on to a digital format and the Mercury is still only producing paper newspaper then this could also be a cause for why the number
of readers has declined.

Second, the author of the article might fall to the common flaw of comparing apples to oranges. He is comparing the Bugle to the Mercury without stating that these newspapers are providing the same type of content. If the Bugle is a sportsnewspaper and the Mercury is a newspaper that focusses on economics, then the one should not affect the other even in the slightest.

And lastly, the article assumes by dropping the price the number of readers will go up. This is a far reaching assumption that cannot be fully assessed untill we have more information. If details would be provided such as a comparison of the increase of readers of other newspapers within the region, we could assess if there is a overall decline or if only the Bugle was affected. Or If we would know what type of content each newspaper provides, then we could properly compare the two newspapers. Untill the missing information is provided we cannot properly assess the validity of the argument
and the argument remains unconvincing.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 12 Oct 2023, 13:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AWA Score: 4 - 4.5 out of 6

Coherence and Connectivity (4.5/6):
The essay demonstrates some coherence and connectivity between ideas, but it lacks a clear structure to guide the reader through the argument. The introduction is brief, and the body of the essay consists of separate points without smooth transitions between them. The connections between ideas could be strengthened to enhance overall coherence.

Word Structure (4/6):
The essay uses vocabulary effectively to convey ideas. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and word choices that hinder clarity and precision. Some sentences could benefit from more refined word structure.

Paragraph Structure and Formation (4/6):
The essay is divided into paragraphs, but they lack a consistent structure and could be more clearly organized. Each paragraph should have a well-defined focus, and the overall essay structure could be improved to enhance the logical flow of ideas.

Language and Grammar (4/6):
The language and grammar need improvement. There are several grammatical errors and awkwardly structured sentences that affect the overall quality of the essay. Proofreading and revision are necessary to rectify these issues.

Vocabulary and Word Expression (4/6):
The essay employs a reasonable range of vocabulary and expressions. However, there are instances where word choices could be refined for more precise communication and added impact. Some sentences lack clarity due to word expression.

Overall, the essay contains valuable points, but it needs more refinement in terms of coherence, word structure, paragraph formation, language, and grammar. Strengthening these aspects would significantly enhance the clarity and effectiveness of the essay.

GreyRift
Hey there,

I have been working on my AWA skills. So far I have been receiving super good feedback from the forum but I am still not where I would like to be.
Could you please provide feedback on my AWA below.

Response Essay:


The announcement talks about how a competing lower priced newspaper, The Bugle, is lowering the number of readers of one newspaper, The Mercury.
It states that since, the Bugle has started the amount of readers has declined by 10,000 readers. The argument fails to take several other potential causes into account and falls victim to some logical flaws such as but not limited to, comparing apples to oranges and making broad assumptions.

First, the article assumes that the reduced number of readers of mainly due to the competing newspaper the Bugle. This might not neccesarily be the case as there are other market variables, which could cause the number of readers to dwindle. If for example the entire industry has moved on to a digital format and the Mercury is still only producing paper newspaper then this could also be a cause for why the number
of readers has declined.

Second, the author of the article might fall to the common flaw of comparing apples to oranges. He is comparing the Bugle to the Mercury without stating that these newspapers are providing the same type of content. If the Bugle is a sportsnewspaper and the Mercury is a newspaper that focusses on economics, then the one should not affect the other even in the slightest.

And lastly, the article assumes by dropping the price the number of readers will go up. This is a far reaching assumption that cannot be fully assessed untill we have more information. If details would be provided such as a comparison of the increase of readers of other newspapers within the region, we could assess if there is a overall decline or if only the Bugle was affected. Or If we would know what type of content each newspaper provides, then we could properly compare the two newspapers. Untill the missing information is provided we cannot properly assess the validity of the argument
and the argument remains unconvincing.
Show more
User avatar
wasario
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2022
Last visit: 12 Sep 2025
Posts: 55
Own Kudos:
58
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 55
Kudos: 58
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 13 Jan 2024, 17:10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi could I please have my essay graded too on this prompt? Thanks!

Essay:

The argument presents the claim that the best to get people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. However, this claim is supported by dubious logic, jumps to conclusions, and a lack of undeniable evidence. As a result, the argument is flawed, weak, and unconvincing.

To begin with, the argument states that since The Bugle, a lower priced newspaper, was started 5 years ago, The Mercury’s circulation declined by 10000 readers. Though this may seem like a potentially convincing piece of evidence at first glance, closer inspection reveals many unconsidered factors in this statistic. Firstly, there are many factors as to why The Mercury’s circulation could have declined, including, but not limited to, a lack of printed copies, readers choosing to read news on the internet rather than the newspaper, or a different competitor altogether, all of which have nothing to do with The Bugle. Additionally, even if circulation went down by 10000 readers, there is no information regarding how many readers there are at the moment, and if that number happens to be a big figure in the millions, then a 10000 in 5 years may not be a reason for concern at all. In order to make this piece of evidence more convincing to the argument’s main point, the argument should provide more background details specifically discussing how The Bugle in particular is the main reason for The Mercury’s noticeable decline in readers.

Second, the argument states that the best way to increase the reader count of The Mercury is to lower the price of the newspaper below that of The Bugle. Once again, however, this statement is baseless and is an illogical jump to conclusion. Starting off with the price point, there is no presented proof that shows that the price is the reason for the reader count dropping; as discussed in the last paragraph, there are many other factors unrelated to The Bugle that could be at play here. However, assuming that The Bugle’s newspaper is the perpetrator of this 5-year trend, there are still other reasons that The Bugle’s newspaper could be prevailing over The Mercury’s in reader count, such as a wider range of news coverage, more people talking about The Bugle rather than The Mercury, or a higher amount of funding from sponsors and consequently more printing power. Had the argument shown evidence that the price point is the reason why former readers of The Mercury are not reading The Mercury’s newspaper, and that those same readers are flocking to The Bugle’s newspaper, this would have been a more convincing statement.

Lastly, the argument mentions that increased circulation of The Mercury’s newspapers will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. While this would be a good way to earn back revenue for The Mercury, there is no such guarantee that this chain of events would occur should circulation rise. One of the reasons is that controversy, such as scandals or corrupt individuals in a company, often scares potential readers and investors away from said company, and no matter how much circulation The Mercury may have, if they are involved in such controversy then other business would not be willing to advertise on The Mercury’s paper out of fear of public reputation. On top of this, even if increased circulation does bring in more advertising from businesses, there is no proof showing that this would help increase readership; ironically, this could potentially make readers actually less willing to read The Mercury. Advertisements are often viewed as annoying by media consumers, hence why despite companies’ best efforts to force consumers to watch ads (like YouTube for example), people find ways around them, including adblockers or pirated content. As such, while on one hand inviting businesses to take up more advertising space in The Mercury’s would provide a source of revenue, on the other hand it has the possibility of alienating readers of The Mercury and driving them away to read other newspapers with less advertisements in them. Hence, the argument needs to present a evidence showcasing that the number of businesses willing to advertise on The Mercury and the number of readers of The Mercury share a directly proportional relationship and not an inversely proportional one.

In conclusion, the publisher of the announcement shown above fails to deliver a convincing argument supporting his/her proposed plan to increase the reader-base of The Mercury newspaper, and consequently relies on illogical jumps to conclusions and weak evidence. In order to better assess the situation and present a concretely supported argument, it is essential that the publisher provides strong evidence bolstering his/her reasoning, assess all related factors, and eliminates room for any contrasting points that may serve to undermine the argument’s claim.
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,304
Own Kudos:
49,316
Given Kudos: 6,180
GPA: 3.62
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 17,304
Kudos: 49,316
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five 14 Jan 2024, 12:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 6/6
The essay demonstrates excellent coherence and connectivity. Each paragraph is logically organized, and there is a clear progression of ideas from one point to the next. Transitions between sentences and paragraphs are smooth, contributing to the overall flow of the essay.

Word structure: 5.5/6
The essay employs a varied and sophisticated vocabulary, contributing to the overall clarity and precision of expression. There are some minor instances where word choice could be more precise, but the language is generally strong and effectively conveys the intended meaning.

Paragraph structure and formation: 5.5/6
Paragraphs are well-structured with clear topic sentences and supporting details. The essay effectively uses evidence and examples to support each point, contributing to a well-developed argument. However, there are a few instances where the essay could benefit from more explicit transitions between ideas within paragraphs.

Language and Grammar: 6/6
The essay exhibits strong language and grammar usage. Sentences are grammatically correct, and the writing style is sophisticated. The essay effectively employs a range of sentence structures, enhancing overall readability.

Vocabulary and word expression: 5.5/6
The vocabulary used in the essay is rich and appropriate for the task. However, there are a few instances where more precise word choices could be employed to enhance the expression of ideas. Overall, the vocabulary contributes significantly to the overall quality of the essay.

Overall, the essay is well-structured, effectively presents a critique of the argument, and demonstrates a high level of coherence and language proficiency.

wasario
Hi could I please have my essay graded too on this prompt? Thanks!

Essay:

The argument presents the claim that the best to get people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. However, this claim is supported by dubious logic, jumps to conclusions, and a lack of undeniable evidence. As a result, the argument is flawed, weak, and unconvincing.

To begin with, the argument states that since The Bugle, a lower priced newspaper, was started 5 years ago, The Mercury’s circulation declined by 10000 readers. Though this may seem like a potentially convincing piece of evidence at first glance, closer inspection reveals many unconsidered factors in this statistic. Firstly, there are many factors as to why The Mercury’s circulation could have declined, including, but not limited to, a lack of printed copies, readers choosing to read news on the internet rather than the newspaper, or a different competitor altogether, all of which have nothing to do with The Bugle. Additionally, even if circulation went down by 10000 readers, there is no information regarding how many readers there are at the moment, and if that number happens to be a big figure in the millions, then a 10000 in 5 years may not be a reason for concern at all. In order to make this piece of evidence more convincing to the argument’s main point, the argument should provide more background details specifically discussing how The Bugle in particular is the main reason for The Mercury’s noticeable decline in readers.

Second, the argument states that the best way to increase the reader count of The Mercury is to lower the price of the newspaper below that of The Bugle. Once again, however, this statement is baseless and is an illogical jump to conclusion. Starting off with the price point, there is no presented proof that shows that the price is the reason for the reader count dropping; as discussed in the last paragraph, there are many other factors unrelated to The Bugle that could be at play here. However, assuming that The Bugle’s newspaper is the perpetrator of this 5-year trend, there are still other reasons that The Bugle’s newspaper could be prevailing over The Mercury’s in reader count, such as a wider range of news coverage, more people talking about The Bugle rather than The Mercury, or a higher amount of funding from sponsors and consequently more printing power. Had the argument shown evidence that the price point is the reason why former readers of The Mercury are not reading The Mercury’s newspaper, and that those same readers are flocking to The Bugle’s newspaper, this would have been a more convincing statement.

Lastly, the argument mentions that increased circulation of The Mercury’s newspapers will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. While this would be a good way to earn back revenue for The Mercury, there is no such guarantee that this chain of events would occur should circulation rise. One of the reasons is that controversy, such as scandals or corrupt individuals in a company, often scares potential readers and investors away from said company, and no matter how much circulation The Mercury may have, if they are involved in such controversy then other business would not be willing to advertise on The Mercury’s paper out of fear of public reputation. On top of this, even if increased circulation does bring in more advertising from businesses, there is no proof showing that this would help increase readership; ironically, this could potentially make readers actually less willing to read The Mercury. Advertisements are often viewed as annoying by media consumers, hence why despite companies’ best efforts to force consumers to watch ads (like YouTube for example), people find ways around them, including adblockers or pirated content. As such, while on one hand inviting businesses to take up more advertising space in The Mercury’s would provide a source of revenue, on the other hand it has the possibility of alienating readers of The Mercury and driving them away to read other newspapers with less advertisements in them. Hence, the argument needs to present a evidence showcasing that the number of businesses willing to advertise on The Mercury and the number of readers of The Mercury share a directly proportional relationship and not an inversely proportional one.

In conclusion, the publisher of the announcement shown above fails to deliver a convincing argument supporting his/her proposed plan to increase the reader-base of The Mercury newspaper, and consequently relies on illogical jumps to conclusions and weak evidence. In order to better assess the situation and present a concretely supported argument, it is essential that the publisher provides strong evidence bolstering his/her reasoning, assess all related factors, and eliminates room for any contrasting points that may serve to undermine the argument’s claim.
Show more
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts