Hello cooperwharrison
Welcome to GMAT Club!Please follow the AWA subforum posting rules before posting in the forum. Read the rules in the post in the link below
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.htmlPlease repost your essay according to the posting rules. Don't forget to post the prompt your essay is based on.
Thank you!cooperwharrison wrote:
Looking for feedback on my essay below. Thanks in advance for any help!
-----------------------
The argument claims that foreign competitors to Motorcycle X must be failing to attract customers from Motorcycle X for a reason other than motorcycle X being more noisy. This argument is flawed in several ways. The argument utilizes vague language, invalid comparisons, and poor reasoning.
To begin, the argument employs language like “some say” and “at least as well”. This language is vague and unconvincing. The arguments cites evidence that “some say” that competitors products are failing because they are less noisy. This causes the reader to doubt the credibility of the source. The argument gives no indication as to who these people are, for all we know it could be one person they quoted that has no actual legitimacy in the industry. The argument also states that foreign cars sell “at least as well” as American made cars. Again, this does not give a clear comparison and could mean that foreign cars sell barely better than American cars or that foreign cars sell significantly better than American cars. The vague language weakens the argument and casts doubt on the credibility of the argument.
The argument also relies on a comparison that may not be valid. The justification for noise not being the main factor in the sales difference relies on a comparison between car customers and motorcycle customers. However, this is inherently flawed as car customers are much different than motorcycle customers. People often buy motorcycles for much different reasons than cars. In many cases, motorcycle riders only use their motorcycles for joy rides and want a loud ride. Car customers are usually using their cars for commuting and every tasks. A more accurate comparison could possibly be between motorcycles customers and sports car customers. This failed comparison drastically weakens the argument that noise is not the explanation for the difference in sales.
Lastly, the final sentence of the argument reasons that because commercials for Motorcycle X don’t have engine noise, again the noise must not be the issue causing the the difference in sales. This is poor reasoning for various reasons. There could be several other reasons why the commercial does not have motorcycle noise and there no way to prove that it’s not used in the commercial because customers aren’t focused on the motorcycle noise. Possible other reasons could be that people just don’t like hearing loud motorcycle noises during commercials or that most people are already familiar with how loudness of Motorcycle X brand motorcycles.
In conclusion, the article fails because of the above mentioned reasons. It would be much more convincing if the author clearly stated the relevant facts, utilized accurate comparisons, and removed some of the mentioned flaws in the reasoning. Customer surveys with reviews of what customer’s like about Motorcycle X versus its competitors could be great supporting evidence for this argument. Unfortunately, without further evidence this argument remains unsubstantiated and up for debate.