|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
22 Dec 2022, 07:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
This is my first attempt, i'd like your feedback!
The argument above suggest that corporations should consider moving to Helios when seeking new business opportunities and a new location. It emphasises on how Helios is a great location as the unemployment rate has been lower than the regional average and how it is the industrial center. Furthermore the argument states that Helios wants to expand its economic base and thus wants to attract companies, those are focussing on the R&D. However the argument is unconvincing, given the flaws in the logic.
Firstly, the author states that Helios’s unemployment rate was lower that the regional average. But we don’t know exactly how low it was. No data that can strengthen this argument is provided. For example, the unemployment rate can be 20% lower than the regional average which is a remarkable difference but it can also be 1% lower than the regional average which is not a very prominent difference.
Secondly, the author discusses the unemployment rate as a prime focus for the corporations to choose Helios as the ideal city for their business. Taking such an important decision only considering the unemployment rate is not wise. There are several factors that a corporation has to take in account before seeking business oppurtunities like the target market, the distance of inputs, the cost of setting up etc. Therefore, the unemployment rate is not the only important factor.
Lastly, the author suggests that Helios is preferring companies only focused on the research and development of innovative technologies. There are various types of corporations having their niche in various sectors, and they might not benefit from establishing their business in Helios. Thus by only keeping in mind one type of corporation and then concluding is flawed.
To conclude, the given argument falls short in many aspect. The argument could have been more convincing if logical explanations and relevant data would have been provided but the the absence of these the argument remains flawed.
The argument above suggest that corporations should consider moving to Helios when seeking new business opportunities and a new location. It emphasises on how Helios is a great location as the unemployment rate has been lower than the regional average and how it is the industrial center. Furthermore the argument states that Helios wants to expand its economic base and thus wants to attract companies, those are focussing on the R&D. However the argument is unconvincing, given the flaws in the logic.
Firstly, the author states that Helios’s unemployment rate was lower that the regional average. But we don’t know exactly how low it was. No data that can strengthen this argument is provided. For example, the unemployment rate can be 20% lower than the regional average which is a remarkable difference but it can also be 1% lower than the regional average which is not a very prominent difference.
Secondly, the author discusses the unemployment rate as a prime focus for the corporations to choose Helios as the ideal city for their business. Taking such an important decision only considering the unemployment rate is not wise. There are several factors that a corporation has to take in account before seeking business oppurtunities like the target market, the distance of inputs, the cost of setting up etc. Therefore, the unemployment rate is not the only important factor.
Lastly, the author suggests that Helios is preferring companies only focused on the research and development of innovative technologies. There are various types of corporations having their niche in various sectors, and they might not benefit from establishing their business in Helios. Thus by only keeping in mind one type of corporation and then concluding is flawed.
To conclude, the given argument falls short in many aspect. The argument could have been more convincing if logical explanations and relevant data would have been provided but the the absence of these the argument remains flawed.
22 Dec 2022, 07:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Welcome to GMAT Club!
Your post is incomplete you haven't posted the argument you are answering to. Also please read the posting rules of this forum and post your essay again according to the rules. Read the rules in the post below in the link.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
This post is being moved to the archive.
Thank you!
Your post is incomplete you haven't posted the argument you are answering to. Also please read the posting rules of this forum and post your essay again according to the rules. Read the rules in the post below in the link.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
This post is being moved to the archive.
Thank you!
yuktimahajan3
Moderators:
188 posts
