|
|
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.
22 Sep 2021, 02:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
Starting a new discussion for the topic as the only other discussion didn't have a reply option and was very old.
I was hoping to get an analysis of my AWA and any further improvements I could make?
Prompt -
The following appeared as a memorandum from the vice-president of the Dolci candy company:
"Given the success of our premium and most expensive line of chocolate candies in a recent taste test and the consequent increase in sales, we should shift our business focus to producing additional lines of premium candy rather than our lower-priced, ordinary candies. When the current economic boom ends and consumers can no longer buy major luxury items, such as cars, they will still want to indulge in small luxuries, such as expensive candies.”
My response -
The argument by the Vice President of Dolci candy company in a memorandum states that increasing the production of the premium, expensive candies they sell would be a succesful business decision for the company. He bases this, on the recent increase in the sales of the premium candies. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and provides a distorted picture of the reality. The conclusion of the argument heavily relies on assumptions that have not been substantiated. Hence the argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument claims that given the increased sales of the premium, more expensive candies it would make sense to move focus away from the lower priced candies the company has been producing. This argument is a stretch because there are no clear numbers to inform as to how much the sales have increased by and what the contribution of each of these two groups has been on the company's topline. For example, even if the sales of the expensive candies have increased from say 15% to 30%,it could be that the lower priced candies contribute a much more, say 70%, to the the total sales of the company. De-emphasizing their importance without understanding the impact of it clearly would not be the right move for the company. This argument would have been more clear if some sales data for both the groups were provided.
Second, the argument also claims that even when the economic boom ends the people would still continue to indulge in small luxuries like the company's premium chocolates. This argument is also unsupported and weak as it fails to take into account the details of this situation. For example, what if there were more market players in the same segment in the future. Also how are we assured, that given the option to spend their hard-earned disposable income, that people would only spend it on premium chocolates. This argument would have benefitted from some projections on what the sales of their premium candies would look like in the future rather than just paint a rosy picture of the reality.
Finally, the Vice President also fails to take into account the changes that would be needed in the supply-chain channels to be able to accomodate the shift from lower cost candies to these premium candies. Does the company have the ability to make these changes without making huge expenditures on their fixed costs? Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument remains more of a wishful thinking rather than a substantive argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and hence unconvincing. In order to find the merits or demerits of the decision, further analysis would be needed in the areas mentioned. Without those, the argument is unsubstantiated and hence open to debate.
I was hoping to get an analysis of my AWA and any further improvements I could make?
Prompt -
The following appeared as a memorandum from the vice-president of the Dolci candy company:
"Given the success of our premium and most expensive line of chocolate candies in a recent taste test and the consequent increase in sales, we should shift our business focus to producing additional lines of premium candy rather than our lower-priced, ordinary candies. When the current economic boom ends and consumers can no longer buy major luxury items, such as cars, they will still want to indulge in small luxuries, such as expensive candies.”
My response -
The argument by the Vice President of Dolci candy company in a memorandum states that increasing the production of the premium, expensive candies they sell would be a succesful business decision for the company. He bases this, on the recent increase in the sales of the premium candies. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and provides a distorted picture of the reality. The conclusion of the argument heavily relies on assumptions that have not been substantiated. Hence the argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, the argument claims that given the increased sales of the premium, more expensive candies it would make sense to move focus away from the lower priced candies the company has been producing. This argument is a stretch because there are no clear numbers to inform as to how much the sales have increased by and what the contribution of each of these two groups has been on the company's topline. For example, even if the sales of the expensive candies have increased from say 15% to 30%,it could be that the lower priced candies contribute a much more, say 70%, to the the total sales of the company. De-emphasizing their importance without understanding the impact of it clearly would not be the right move for the company. This argument would have been more clear if some sales data for both the groups were provided.
Second, the argument also claims that even when the economic boom ends the people would still continue to indulge in small luxuries like the company's premium chocolates. This argument is also unsupported and weak as it fails to take into account the details of this situation. For example, what if there were more market players in the same segment in the future. Also how are we assured, that given the option to spend their hard-earned disposable income, that people would only spend it on premium chocolates. This argument would have benefitted from some projections on what the sales of their premium candies would look like in the future rather than just paint a rosy picture of the reality.
Finally, the Vice President also fails to take into account the changes that would be needed in the supply-chain channels to be able to accomodate the shift from lower cost candies to these premium candies. Does the company have the ability to make these changes without making huge expenditures on their fixed costs? Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument remains more of a wishful thinking rather than a substantive argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and hence unconvincing. In order to find the merits or demerits of the decision, further analysis would be needed in the areas mentioned. Without those, the argument is unsubstantiated and hence open to debate.
22 Sep 2021, 12:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 4.5-5 out of 6!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 3.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 3.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Read the AWA forum rules before posting anything up, read the rules in the post in the link below
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
anisha98
Moderator:
