Please Rate - I wrote this in a noisy office.

The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

“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.”

Discuss how well reasoned … etc.


The announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury is flawed and should be amended. The announcement needs to better address the cost differences between the two newspapers in regarsd to readership, advertisers, and production over the past 5 years. Additionally, the annoucement needs to address what the readership levels have been over the past 5 years for both newspapers; this is extremely important. How did the publisher of The Mercury determine that the best way to gain readership is by reducing the price? How much should the price be reduced by? Is this, in fact, the best way to increase readership? The issues need to be addressed.

We know that The Bugle is lower priced than The Mercury to the readership. Is it a big difference in costs? We can't make any assumptions on what the price for each newspaper is. We can't assume how much of an impact the difference in cost would have. If The Mercury decided to lower the newspaper cost to a price that is lower than The Bugle, how much of an impact would that have? The publisher needs to know the price differences with the advertising costs as well. The advertisement costs may be through the roof or it may be low as well. There are many unknowns in terms of pricing and costs to the readership, advertisers, and the production team.

There may be a number of reasons that the circulation of The Mercury is down by 10,000 readers. We don't know if 10,000 is a large decline. This number is relative to the total readership. What is the readership total for both publications? We need this information to make a more realistic conculsion. The Mercury is a weekly-printed publication. It may be possible that the 10,000 readers who used to read the paper don't anymore because the paper wasn't printed often enough for their liking. Are there any other possible causes for a decline in readership?

Reducing the price may help increase The Mercury's readership but it may inadvertadly cause the newspaper to go bankrupt. We need more information about what the expenses are for The Mercury. What is The Bugle doing right? An assumption that a reader of the publisher's opine may make is that the readership of The Mercury may have jumped shipped to The Bugle. However, this may be a flawed assumption. The readership may simply not be interested in reading newspapers anymore.

The Mercury needs to address all the costs and expenses related to the newspaper. It would behoove the publisher of The Mercury to do an extensive poll to see why the readership left and what can be done to improve the situation for those infividuals. If after more intensive research The Mercury decides that lowering the newspaper's price is the best option, then at least it has done the research necessary to make such an important decision. If The Mercury has done this research, please express that in the published piece because at this reading, the publisher's opine is flawed and relies heavily on assumptions.

(went over time by 6 minutes - a bunch of spelling mistakes)

(From Manhattan GMAT as directed by the Maggosh study plan) Prompt:The country of Tarquinia has a much higher rate of traffic accidents per person than its neighbors, and in the vast majority of cases one or more drivers is found to be at fault in the courts. Therefore, Tarquinia should abolish driver-side seatbelts, airbags, and other safety measures that protect the driver, while new cars should be installed with a spike on the steering column pointed at the driver's heart. These measures will eliminate traffic accidents in Tarquinia by motivating drivers to drive safely.

Tarquina, a country with a higher rate of traffic accidents than its neighboring countries, wants to motivate drivers to drive safely. However, the argument that is presented is quite flawed and needs a healthy dose of improvement. There are quite a few assumptions that are being made in the argument that need to be expoused on: the higher rate of traffic accidents, courts and their decisions, and the "stick" mechanism with the use of the spike, to name a few.

How high is the rate of traffic accidents per person in Tarquina in comparison to its neighboring countries? Since we don't know exactly how high the rate is in comparison to other counties, we can't look at another country and see what it is doing right. We should be able to compare and contrast what another country is doing to mitigate the amount of traffict accidents it has. The rate of traffic accidents in Tarquina may be significantly higher than its neighbors because of a great population size which may or may not mean more accident could possibly occur. Other countries may have significant investments in public transportation and more residents may prefer to take a bus than drive a car. It may be possible that residents in the neighboring lands can walk to mostly whereever they need to go, eliminating the need to drive a car around.

Imagine a scene where you were in a courtroom and were rear-ended by another driver for driving at the speed-limit and not at the speed of traffic which was moving faster. The judge declares that you are guilty for driving to slow and causing an accident. Sometimes it doesn't matter how safe you drive, accidents can still happen. Considering this, removing the safety belts, airbags, and other safety measures is simply ludicrous. If the idea to remove these safety items from new cars were implemented, there is a greater possibility of fatalities from these traffic accidents.
The spike in itself may be a "stick" and may allow drivers to be cognizant of the necessity to drive safely, however, this method is ill-advised due to the fatal nature of the method. As mentioned previously herein, accidents can still happen regardless of how safe a driver is. This means that someone can rear-end another driver and both drivers would be instantly killed. This is a very extreme way to elimante traffic accidents and drivers. Drivers will not want to buy new cars with this spike impalment feature.

In essence, the great country of Tarquina needs to consider that there are many mechanisms at play and that what may seem like a simple fix may be worse for the country. We have outlined quite a few reasons the argument needs improvement but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Again, as stated before, the argument needs a vast amount of amending

yes. I know I've made a few spelling errors and some grammatical errors such as fragmented sentences.

The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life:

“Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios’s unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies.”

Discuss how well reasoned … etc.

The article written in the regional life magazine might 'on the face' attract businesses but an in depth analysis on the article or what the article lacks is needed. While the article attempts to make some good points in regards to the City of Helios Economic Development initiatives, the article fails to substantiate its claims.

The article attemps to attract businesses to Helios by mentioning that the "low" unemployment rate in the last recession is an attractive reason to move a business there. The "low" unemployment rate wasn't defined and may in fact not be low at all. Since the Helios unemployment rate is lower than the regional unemployment rate, that should be a good thing. However, is the Helios unemployment rate lower than other cities in the state or even nationally? Since the unemployment rate for various localities aren't defined, the businesses reading the article can't make a decision on how low the unemployment rate is in Helios. In fact, it may be quite high but lower relative to the region.

Since many manufacturing companies exist in Helios, would it in fact be a good idea to attract R&D companies. R&D companies can have real estate that falls under the 'industrial' type of building. However, these buildings are quite specialized and the buildings in Helios may not be the type of buildings R&D companies need. Additionally, what incentives will R&D companies have to move their operations to the City of Helios. The article isn't clear about this point. A company would need to know the incentives before moving operations.

While the City is attempting to attract businesses to Helios now, the article cites the economic conditions of the past. The economic conditions don't necessarily reflect the current situation in Helios or even in the surrounding regions. Helios may have had a relatively desireable manufacturing climate in the past but the current economic situation may sanction a different or better location for a business to move its operation to. What happened in the past doesn't necessarilly equal the future and it might be a good idead for the article to touch on the benefits of the current economic climate in Helios compared to its regional partners.

In essence, the article expouses some of the benefits that a manufacturer can gain by moving the businesses operations to the city of Helios. However, the article fails in expanding on those benefits. The article needs to be more clear on the reasons why a business should move to Helios. Helios seems like a great city for manufacturing or R&D operations but a business wouldn't be able to determine that simply by reading the article published. Any business could see that the article is flawed and needs some additional information.

The article in the health section of a trends and lifestyle magazine suggests that people who consume aspartame, an artificial sweeter, are better off consuming sugar. The article continues, "Aspartame can actually contribute to weight gain rather than weight loss." This article is flawed in that it makes the reader believe that sugar is a mechanism for weight loss or that it is healthy. Both ideas are farther from the truth than not.

While there aren't any references in the article to back up the claim that sugar consumption 45 minutes after continuous exercise will actually enhance the body's ability to burn fat, we will make the assumption that this is true. Even if this is true, it doesn't mean that sugar is better. People that consume sugar may not plan on exercising and may not get the advantage the working out and consuming sugar may provide.

Additionally, while the article tends to put sugar in a good light, there may be other harmful effects of sugar that may or may not be worse than aspartme. Sugar may lead to weight gain, diabetes, and other illnesses. These effects are not included in the article and should be in order to display the harmful effects of sugar. A single benefit to sugar doesn't outweigh the potential downsides.

What are the effects of high amounts of sugar on the body? The article doesn't go into detail about this. Excess sugar consumption may cause harm to the body. If a person works out for only 30 minutes or works out for an hour but it's not continuous, do they not gain the weight loss advantage from consuming sugar? While the article doesn't address this, consuming sugar may lead to consuming more sugar. More than likely, anyone consuming sugar after a workout will consume sugar at other times throughout the day.

In conclusion, the article could use a bit more sweetness. The arrticle is poorly written and needs to address the harmful effects of sugar. Making an incomplete comparison between sugar and aspartame doesn't lend itself to informing the reader of good lifestyle choices. Sugar isn't better and the article doesn't reflect this.

The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter:

“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs.”

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

--------------------------------

The editorial of the corporate newseletter attempts to express that workers are interested in management issues, however, the editorial does a bad job of cementing that point. In trying to make the point that workers are interested in management issues, the editorial discusses recently published survey results of a survey with a very small sample size. In addition, the editorial attempts to prove that premise by acknowledging the large percentage of respondents who answered in the affirmative to interest in management issues. These arguments, when analyzed, may be misinterpreted by the reader.

To lessen variance in the average survey results, the sample size of respondents should be significantly higher than those survey respondent of the aformentioned survey questionaire. Considering that there are many workers in the world, or even in a small city, the 1,200 respondents are clearly not enough to determine more accurate survey results. The survey publisher could have theoretically sent out the survey to only a handful of readers. These readers may be more interested in management issues that workers who don't read the periodical. Additionally, 79%, less than 1,000, respondents affirm interest in management issues. This is not promising evidence.

The topics that the editorital highlights from the survey to prove worker interest in management issues are "corporate restructuring" and a "redesign of benefits." While these are issues that management may deals with, this two issues do not comprehensively answer for all management issues. There are many more management issues that may have been addresses in the survey questionaire that are not being addressed by the editorial because the results may skew the objective of the editorial. Furthermore, the survey may not have had other issues listed and respondents may have only responded to those two issues presented. The editorial isn't clear enough about the survey results.

What type of questions were in this survey? How were the questions worded? Is it possible that the survey was designed in such a way to skew results? The editorial doesn't go into that much details to explain much about the survey, the results, and who it targeted for a response. The 21% that didn't respond affirmatively may be management; we don't know.

In essence, the editor and staff must reach out to many more respondents before an editorial like such is published. A large base of respondents, especially from workers, will provide enough evidence and justification for the premise of workers being interested in management issues. 100,000 workers responding to the survey in the affirmative is better than only sub 1,000 affirmative responses. Additionally, the editorial should include many more topics relating to management issues for the workers to respond to. All these issues and the survey responses should be presented in the editorial regardless of whether it proves the premise or not. This is called 'honest reporting.' The editiorial needs to be re-written and be more transparent.

Everyone has an opinion; some people feel the need to express it despite how flawed it may be. It seems like the author of the opinion piece for the financial magazine made the same mistake. The piece makes arguments on purported evidence that is not substantiated in fact. For instance, the percentage of consumers isn't established, the correlation between what a certain demographic of consumer purchases now and what a future demographic may purchase, and a potential change to retail products offered that can potentially have devasting consquences. This opinion piece is highly flawed and needs to be improved.

The article introduces the average middle-aged consumer that has a retail spend of nearly 40 percent, and introduces a younger demographic consumer that has an average retail spend of only 25 percent. While these statistics should mean something, it doesn't tell us much. How was this data collected? Are these percentages inclusive of all retail business type or certain specific business types. How the data was collected is important in that it will help us interpret the data better.

The data doesn't help us predict the future. Even if the data and percentages are spot on, it only tells us a part of the story - what happened in the past. Consumer spend as it has been in the past isn't an indicator of what will happen in the future. Some analysts may use the data as a guide, but predictions often come with a certain margin of error. The author of the piece can't make a determination that retail sales will increase with the younger demographic in a decade. Considering that the younger generation currently has a lower percentage of retail spend, one can't make the assumption that that generation will spend more a decade from now. The younger generation might be more financially conscious, more spend averse or frugal, there may be a downturn in the economy.

Additionally, if a change is made to what type of items a retail location carries, that might have an adverse effect than the intended effect. Taking younger generation product off the shelf might destroy any percentage of consumer spending in retail for the younger crowd. This change may not even cause the middle-aged consumer to spend more.

In essence, this article has quite a few flaws that are centered aroun making false assumptions and predictions based on incomplete information. The information located in the article doesn't allow for the reader to act with certainty on the information. Just because the average retail spend for middle aged consumers is greater than average spend for younger consumers now, doesn't mean that will be the case in the future and using that data point as a predictive mechanism is a patently flawed thing to do.