AWA Rating - Please rate my essay, thank you really much in advance
[#permalink]
02 Sep 2015, 10:52
A company can increase revenue by either either by a rise in increasing overall sales or by selling the same amount of goods at a higher price. In the preceding his statement, the author claims that a dramatic increase in unit sales will undoubtedly lead to an improved increased profitability of the corresponding product. Though this claim may well have his its merit, the author states a poorly reasoned argument, based on several poorly reasoned premises and assumptions, and based solely on the arguments the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid. (previous sentence was run-on, try something simple like...) the author's argument is ultimately unacceptable due to poorly reasoned premises and assumptions.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The reasoning in the editorial is flawed because it erroneously assumes that a favourable reception by the majority of customers will consequently lead to increased unit sales. First of all, the author does not state anything about the sample size at all; this is a crucial argument as it might be heavily biased and thus has no meaning at all. Secondly, it states that the majority favours this move. This consequently leaves people, who are not satisfied with this move from the company. It is well known that unhappy customers much worse for a corporation than happy customers are positive for the company. As a result, the decrease in price might even have a negative effect on the image of the product. The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lacks any legitimate evidentiary support and renders his conclusion unacceptable. this isn't a very business-y argument for a few reasons, most important of which is that most people are happy when prices go down. I get what you're saying with "negative impact on the image" but this isn't Louis Vuitton luggage we're talking about--it's an energy drink.
(I assume what you're trying to say in the paragraph above is that the author's assumptions re: price reductions are flawed. Though the author claims that polled consumers received the price reduction favorably, the sample size of this poll is unknown. Therefore we cannot assume that the move was received favorably and that is why sales increased. Indeed, sales could have increased on this specific product for another reason. This same increase in sales may not translate to other beverages.)
In addition, the author makes one key assumption that remains unproven. He assumes that the increased unit sales will consequently make the product more profitable. (too wordy. Make it one sentence) Profitability is revenue minus costs. Costs will stay the same while revenue might fall after all if the additional sales cannot compensate the loss of the additional net profit per energy drink. Furthermore, he assumes that a price reduction for one of the company's products has the same effect on every other product. This is a crucial mistake as also beverages can differ significantly from each other. No one would make commercials of Coca Cola in the same way as one would do with Duff beer.
(I would lead with your point about differing production costs across beverage types, since that is really what we're dealing with. Discounting some beverages may lead to a loss in profit per unit. And since, as stated in your previous paragraph, we cannot necessarily count on an increase in sales volume, the company could face an overall decrease in profitability.)
While the author does have several key issues in his arguments's premises and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base.(this sentence doesn't make sense. I would say while the author's argument is deeply flawed, it is not entirely without merit.But in order to prove his [s]argumentation, he definitely needs to include[/s] He could strengthen his argument by including figures about product sales and net profitability per energy drink before and after the price reduction. Moreover, he shouldThe author could also describe the sample size and the questions of the consumer survey more in detail. As a result, though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly. (too wordy and redundant. Do something like...) Such information would allow the author and other decision makers to clearly understand the results of the price reduction and use them to craft an effective strategy moving forward.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his reader's minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince only few people.
you don't need this parargraph