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.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Vinish Chopra
Joined: 16 Jul 2017
Last visit: 15 Oct 2024
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
Location: India
Schools: Schulich Sept '21 (I) Goizueta '21 (I)
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.6
16 Jul 2017, 00:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi, can anyone please help in evaluating my AWA essay?
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.
Essay
The argument states that The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers due to a competing lower priced newspaper, The Bugle and it can be increased to former levels by reducing its price below that of The Bugle which will in turn attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. The argument fails to consider several aspects which are necessary to evaluate the argument and draw a logical conclusion. Thus, the argument seems weak, unconvincing and flawed.
First, the premise says that The Mercury’s readership decreased by 10,000 readers since the entry of The Bugle into the market. We do not have overall readership statistics for the past five years. It might be a case that the entire newspaper industry has seen a decline in readers and The Mercury is least affected by it. Also, we do not have any statistics on the readership of The Bugle. It might be possible that The Bugle is itself struggling and The Mercury is facing competition from some other partners in the playground. The author should have presented relevant data along with the argument to support the premise.
Second, the author considers the low price of The Bugle as the reason for decline in its readership. However, there can be many other reasons for the decline which the author missed to consider. The Mercury is a weekly newspaper whereas we do not have an information regarding the frequency of The Bugle. It might be a case that the latter has a higher frequency, say daily, weekdays or weekends and this might be causing a decline in the former’s readership. Also, it might be a case that the quality of content in The Mercury has degraded over the past five years and it has caused readers shift to other alternatives. If any of these reasons are true, price reduction will not help to solve the issue here. Since there is no discussion on these lines in the argument, this makes the argument weak and inconclusive.
Last, the argument states that increased circulation will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This statement is incomplete without relevant data on the readers of this newspaper. We need to know which age group, economy group, gender comprises the maximum readers of this newspaper. After having relevant data on these aspects, we will be in a better position to comment whether more advertisers will choose this newspaper over others to reach out to their target audience.
In summary, the argument has several flaws and is insufficient to draw a logical conclusion. It failed to consider several factors which were necessary for its evaluation. If it would have considered the above points, the argument have been a much stronger. However, as such, the argument is weak, flawed, inconclusive and lacks supporting data.
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.
Essay
The argument states that The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers due to a competing lower priced newspaper, The Bugle and it can be increased to former levels by reducing its price below that of The Bugle which will in turn attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. The argument fails to consider several aspects which are necessary to evaluate the argument and draw a logical conclusion. Thus, the argument seems weak, unconvincing and flawed.
First, the premise says that The Mercury’s readership decreased by 10,000 readers since the entry of The Bugle into the market. We do not have overall readership statistics for the past five years. It might be a case that the entire newspaper industry has seen a decline in readers and The Mercury is least affected by it. Also, we do not have any statistics on the readership of The Bugle. It might be possible that The Bugle is itself struggling and The Mercury is facing competition from some other partners in the playground. The author should have presented relevant data along with the argument to support the premise.
Second, the author considers the low price of The Bugle as the reason for decline in its readership. However, there can be many other reasons for the decline which the author missed to consider. The Mercury is a weekly newspaper whereas we do not have an information regarding the frequency of The Bugle. It might be a case that the latter has a higher frequency, say daily, weekdays or weekends and this might be causing a decline in the former’s readership. Also, it might be a case that the quality of content in The Mercury has degraded over the past five years and it has caused readers shift to other alternatives. If any of these reasons are true, price reduction will not help to solve the issue here. Since there is no discussion on these lines in the argument, this makes the argument weak and inconclusive.
Last, the argument states that increased circulation will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This statement is incomplete without relevant data on the readers of this newspaper. We need to know which age group, economy group, gender comprises the maximum readers of this newspaper. After having relevant data on these aspects, we will be in a better position to comment whether more advertisers will choose this newspaper over others to reach out to their target audience.
In summary, the argument has several flaws and is insufficient to draw a logical conclusion. It failed to consider several factors which were necessary for its evaluation. If it would have considered the above points, the argument have been a much stronger. However, as such, the argument is weak, flawed, inconclusive and lacks supporting data.
