Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
05 Mar 2017, 11:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
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.”
My Answer
The argument presented is completely flawed by vague and superfluous assumptions behind the revival strategy and hence be successful. Not only has the publisher fails to bring out the appropriate reason for the decline of the readership but also falls short of making assumptions that will make the strategy a success.
The publisher vaguely assumes the reason behind The Mercury’s fall in the number of readers as low price of the competing newspaper. He fails to identify other reasons such as rapid increase in poor content, shifting of a popular editor from The Mercury to The Bugle, unmatched profile of the readers to the newspaper and the high advertisement frequency that people generally dislike in the newspaper which could have affected Mercury’s fall in readership. Thereby, it is strongly suggested to review and survey about the appropriate reason behind the fall and thus devise an appropriate strategy for a comeback.
Another baseless assumption that the publisher makes is that reducing the price of the newspaper below the competing newspaper is the best way to get more people read and hence will be a successful strategy for The Mercury’s to revive in the market. This can be reasonably true only if the readers always prefer a cheaper newspaper, but this fact is mentioned nowhere in the publisher’s announcement. Hence this particular strategy may not be a success. Again the publisher may not be targeting at the absolute reasons behind the fall of readership or the shift in readership to the competing newspaper.
Lastly, even if the strategy becomes successful and readership increases, it is vaguely assumed that the newspaper will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in it. As the cost and quality of print of the advertisement are considered to be the deciding factors behind choosing advertising space in the newspaper, The Mercury may fall behind the other newspapers in providing both of it.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the items discussed above, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing.
“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.”
My Answer
The argument presented is completely flawed by vague and superfluous assumptions behind the revival strategy and hence be successful. Not only has the publisher fails to bring out the appropriate reason for the decline of the readership but also falls short of making assumptions that will make the strategy a success.
The publisher vaguely assumes the reason behind The Mercury’s fall in the number of readers as low price of the competing newspaper. He fails to identify other reasons such as rapid increase in poor content, shifting of a popular editor from The Mercury to The Bugle, unmatched profile of the readers to the newspaper and the high advertisement frequency that people generally dislike in the newspaper which could have affected Mercury’s fall in readership. Thereby, it is strongly suggested to review and survey about the appropriate reason behind the fall and thus devise an appropriate strategy for a comeback.
Another baseless assumption that the publisher makes is that reducing the price of the newspaper below the competing newspaper is the best way to get more people read and hence will be a successful strategy for The Mercury’s to revive in the market. This can be reasonably true only if the readers always prefer a cheaper newspaper, but this fact is mentioned nowhere in the publisher’s announcement. Hence this particular strategy may not be a success. Again the publisher may not be targeting at the absolute reasons behind the fall of readership or the shift in readership to the competing newspaper.
Lastly, even if the strategy becomes successful and readership increases, it is vaguely assumed that the newspaper will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in it. As the cost and quality of print of the advertisement are considered to be the deciding factors behind choosing advertising space in the newspaper, The Mercury may fall behind the other newspapers in providing both of it.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the items discussed above, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing.
Moderators:
188 posts
