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 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
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.
28 Apr 2018, 10:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey guys,
I am finishing my GMAT preparation, and now I'm practing for the AWA and would like to have some idea of how I am performing.
As I've have read a few of the templates and tips in here, I decided to write under the 30 minutes restriction to really feel how it would be on test day.
Thanks
***
Argument:
“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 response
The argument claims that the drop in the number of readers of The Mercury newspaper in the past five years has happened because of the introduction of a cheaper competing newspaper, The Bugle. This alone does not constitute a logical argument toward the decrease in readers and it does not provide support or proof to the main statement.
First, by considering the lower price of the competitor as the main reason for the decrease in the number of readers, the author disregards possible flaws from The Mercury newspaper. These flaws may include: a decrease in the quality of the articles, an indifference toward its readers (leading to a shift to other newspapers) or even a drop in interest for paper newspapers in general.
Second, the statement assumes that a decrease in The Mercury price will surely bring back the number of readers to its former levels. One cannot guarantee that solely a change in price would bring the expected results. What if the price drop is seen as a decrease in quality of the newspaper? And what if that reduction affects the total revenue even more and it does not cover the overall costs for the circulation? A price reduction without a proper strategy may bring more harm than good, specially toward reputability.
Third, the argument assumes that not only it will increase the circulation again but it will attract more businesses to buy advertising space – probably assuming the extra revenue from the advertisement will cover for the difference of revenue from the selling price. Once again the author disregards the image and quality element of the proposed reduction. Depending on the type of advertises The Mercury has, by becoming a cheaper (and more popular) newspaper, the current advertisers could decide to leave as it would not aim for the target public it has always advertised for
In conclusion, the argument ignores many relevant facts by choosing only one approach in order to regain the number of readers of The Mercury. In order to be me more convincing the argument could, for instance, show statistics that proved the migration of readers from The Mercury to The Bugle – with the maintenance of total number of newspapers’ readers as a total – or a pool among current and former readers to understand what could improve at The Mercury and what would make them remain or return as reader to the newspaper.
I am finishing my GMAT preparation, and now I'm practing for the AWA and would like to have some idea of how I am performing.
As I've have read a few of the templates and tips in here, I decided to write under the 30 minutes restriction to really feel how it would be on test day.
Thanks
***
Argument:
“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 response
The argument claims that the drop in the number of readers of The Mercury newspaper in the past five years has happened because of the introduction of a cheaper competing newspaper, The Bugle. This alone does not constitute a logical argument toward the decrease in readers and it does not provide support or proof to the main statement.
First, by considering the lower price of the competitor as the main reason for the decrease in the number of readers, the author disregards possible flaws from The Mercury newspaper. These flaws may include: a decrease in the quality of the articles, an indifference toward its readers (leading to a shift to other newspapers) or even a drop in interest for paper newspapers in general.
Second, the statement assumes that a decrease in The Mercury price will surely bring back the number of readers to its former levels. One cannot guarantee that solely a change in price would bring the expected results. What if the price drop is seen as a decrease in quality of the newspaper? And what if that reduction affects the total revenue even more and it does not cover the overall costs for the circulation? A price reduction without a proper strategy may bring more harm than good, specially toward reputability.
Third, the argument assumes that not only it will increase the circulation again but it will attract more businesses to buy advertising space – probably assuming the extra revenue from the advertisement will cover for the difference of revenue from the selling price. Once again the author disregards the image and quality element of the proposed reduction. Depending on the type of advertises The Mercury has, by becoming a cheaper (and more popular) newspaper, the current advertisers could decide to leave as it would not aim for the target public it has always advertised for
In conclusion, the argument ignores many relevant facts by choosing only one approach in order to regain the number of readers of The Mercury. In order to be me more convincing the argument could, for instance, show statistics that proved the migration of readers from The Mercury to The Bugle – with the maintenance of total number of newspapers’ readers as a total – or a pool among current and former readers to understand what could improve at The Mercury and what would make them remain or return as reader to the newspaper.
09 May 2018, 00:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey njesus
I think your essay is pretty good, but could be significantly improved with a few changes.
- the opening paragraph fails to identify the heart of the argument! What you cite as the argument (the mercury's circulation dropped because of the bugle) is only the background assumption to the main argument. the argument is something like: on the basis of a correlation between the start of a competing newspaper and a drop in sales, a causal relation is assumed, and it is argued that a lower price than the competitor will solve the problem. On other words, you have to include the conclusion in the argument! An easy to test this is check that you aren't referring in the following paragraphs to anything you haven't mentioned in the opening paragraph.
You arguments are sound, especially the first two. The last one I find less convincing - while it is possible that some old advertisers may drop the mercury, it's much harder to argue that new ones won't take their place. it can't really be argued that having a larger audience is bad for advertising.
I think your essay is pretty good, but could be significantly improved with a few changes.
- the opening paragraph fails to identify the heart of the argument! What you cite as the argument (the mercury's circulation dropped because of the bugle) is only the background assumption to the main argument. the argument is something like: on the basis of a correlation between the start of a competing newspaper and a drop in sales, a causal relation is assumed, and it is argued that a lower price than the competitor will solve the problem. On other words, you have to include the conclusion in the argument! An easy to test this is check that you aren't referring in the following paragraphs to anything you haven't mentioned in the opening paragraph.
You arguments are sound, especially the first two. The last one I find less convincing - while it is possible that some old advertisers may drop the mercury, it's much harder to argue that new ones won't take their place. it can't really be argued that having a larger audience is bad for advertising.
