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
09 Jan 2021, 07:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become
more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day
service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And
since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to
minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
ESSAY
The given arguement is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, the arguement is based on unwarranted evidence that the food processing industry has seen an advancement in their processing techniques, rendering its main conclusion that Olympic Foods will minimize costs and maximize profits in the upcoming future.
Firstly, an advancement of a particular technique in one industry does not always mean that an advancement in another industry will also have taken place. In the given arguement, we have an example of the film processing industry, which saw a decrease in the cost of a particular print service. The same, however does not apply to the food processing industry. We have no evidence to show that there have been advancements in the food processing technologies in the past 25 years of Olympic Foods existence. If we however get any piece of evidence that suggests that advancements have indeed happened in this industry, we could still make an assumption that processing costs could be reduced.
Another point to be noted here is that the above arguement assumes that both the industries function in a similar way. We have no evidence to support this claim. It can be that due to a technological advancement or discovery, the film processing industry saw a decrease in the processing costs. But the same cannot be said about the food processing industry. We are given no proof that the food processing industry has seen a change in any sort of functioning in the past 25 years.
The arguement also takes into account some vague information. It is assumed that the principles applied to that film processing industry also apply to the food processing industry. But since we do not know what these principles are, this assumption cannot be accepted. The economics of both the industries could be entirely different, and in such case, we cannot assume that Olympic Foods would be able to reduce costs and maximize profits just by following the same principles.
Since the arguement leaves many unanswered assumptions, it fails to make a case that Olymic Foods will be able to reduce costs and increase profits in the upcoming future.
foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become
more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day
service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And
since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to
minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
ESSAY
The given arguement is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, the arguement is based on unwarranted evidence that the food processing industry has seen an advancement in their processing techniques, rendering its main conclusion that Olympic Foods will minimize costs and maximize profits in the upcoming future.
Firstly, an advancement of a particular technique in one industry does not always mean that an advancement in another industry will also have taken place. In the given arguement, we have an example of the film processing industry, which saw a decrease in the cost of a particular print service. The same, however does not apply to the food processing industry. We have no evidence to show that there have been advancements in the food processing technologies in the past 25 years of Olympic Foods existence. If we however get any piece of evidence that suggests that advancements have indeed happened in this industry, we could still make an assumption that processing costs could be reduced.
Another point to be noted here is that the above arguement assumes that both the industries function in a similar way. We have no evidence to support this claim. It can be that due to a technological advancement or discovery, the film processing industry saw a decrease in the processing costs. But the same cannot be said about the food processing industry. We are given no proof that the food processing industry has seen a change in any sort of functioning in the past 25 years.
The arguement also takes into account some vague information. It is assumed that the principles applied to that film processing industry also apply to the food processing industry. But since we do not know what these principles are, this assumption cannot be accepted. The economics of both the industries could be entirely different, and in such case, we cannot assume that Olympic Foods would be able to reduce costs and maximize profits just by following the same principles.
Since the arguement leaves many unanswered assumptions, it fails to make a case that Olymic Foods will be able to reduce costs and increase profits in the upcoming future.
09 Jan 2021, 09:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
varunbhatia1191 - In short, you need to put in some more effort on the AWA section, in order for you to get a score of 5 and above on the real-GMAT. First, the overall length of the essay is a red flag; you need to work on writing a slighter lengthier passage. Also, I see several grammar errors that can pull down your score. Please focus on the easy error types: SV agreement, tense, pronouns, and modifiers. Lastly, please make sure you allocate a good 2-3 minutes at the end of the section, to proofread your writing; doing so will ensure that you eliminate some of the obvious grammar issues.
Moderator:
