Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
09 Feb 2022, 01:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared as part of a business plan by the Capital Idea investment firm:
“In recent years the worldwide demand for fish has grown, and improvements in fishing technology have made larger catches and thus increased supply possible: for example, last year’s tuna catch was 9 percent greater than the previous year’s. To capitalize on these trends, we should therefore invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island, where increasing revenues from tourism indicate a strong local economy.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
“In recent years the worldwide demand for fish has grown, and improvements in fishing technology have made larger catches and thus increased supply possible: for example, last year’s tuna catch was 9 percent greater than the previous year’s. To capitalize on these trends, we should therefore invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island, where increasing revenues from tourism indicate a strong local economy.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument claims that the Capital Idea investment firm should invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island to capitalize on increasing demand for fish worldwide. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that worldwide demand for fish has grown because last year’s tuna catch was 9% greater than the previous years. This statement is a stretch. For instance, while the tuna catch increased 9%, it is not clear from the argument if the increased tuna met the demand or exceeded the demand. Also, it is not evident whether other kinds of fish caught last year were greater than the previous year due to the improvements in fishing technology. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly mentioned further exmples of greater numbers caught for different kinds of fish.
Second, the argument claims that the invest firm should invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish island where increasing revenues from tourism on the island indicate a strong local economy. This is again a very weak claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between increasing tourism revenue and returns on investment. To illustrate, while the fish caught might be increasing due to technological improvements and higher demand, we cannot rule out the possibility of potential danger faced by marine habitat due to ecological imbalance and global warming in recent years. In fact, greater local investments can potentially damage the local marine ecosystem, thereby reducing the number of available fish. If the argument had provided evidence that investing in tartfish processing plant would consistently lead to good returns without affecting fish population, then it would have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, has the author considered investing in other areas related to the fishing industry, such as marine technological research or supply and logistics of fish transport? Also, has the author evaluated whether other investment firms have considered investing in tartfish processing plant? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with an assumption that the claim is more wishful thinking than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws due to the above mentioned reasons. It could be considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned all the relevant facts, such as numbers of different kinds of fish caught, unaffected population growth of fish and other areas of investment opportunity in the fishing industry. In order to assess the claim that the investment firm should invest in tartfish processing plant, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
09 Feb 2022, 10:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 out of 6
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 3.5/5
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 GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 3.5/5
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!
Good Luck
gmatbalar
The following appeared as part of a business plan by the Capital Idea investment firm:
“In recent years the worldwide demand for fish has grown, and improvements in fishing technology have made larger catches and thus increased supply possible: for example, last year’s tuna catch was 9 percent greater than the previous year’s. To capitalize on these trends, we should therefore invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island, where increasing revenues from tourism indicate a strong local economy.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
“In recent years the worldwide demand for fish has grown, and improvements in fishing technology have made larger catches and thus increased supply possible: for example, last year’s tuna catch was 9 percent greater than the previous year’s. To capitalize on these trends, we should therefore invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island, where increasing revenues from tourism indicate a strong local economy.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument claims that the Capital Idea investment firm should invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish Island to capitalize on increasing demand for fish worldwide. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that worldwide demand for fish has grown because last year’s tuna catch was 9% greater than the previous years. This statement is a stretch. For instance, while the tuna catch increased 9%, it is not clear from the argument if the increased tuna met the demand or exceeded the demand. Also, it is not evident whether other kinds of fish caught last year were greater than the previous year due to the improvements in fishing technology. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly mentioned further exmples of greater numbers caught for different kinds of fish.
Second, the argument claims that the invest firm should invest in the new tartfish processing plant on Tartfish island where increasing revenues from tourism on the island indicate a strong local economy. This is again a very weak claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between increasing tourism revenue and returns on investment. To illustrate, while the fish caught might be increasing due to technological improvements and higher demand, we cannot rule out the possibility of potential danger faced by marine habitat due to ecological imbalance and global warming in recent years. In fact, greater local investments can potentially damage the local marine ecosystem, thereby reducing the number of available fish. If the argument had provided evidence that investing in tartfish processing plant would consistently lead to good returns without affecting fish population, then it would have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, has the author considered investing in other areas related to the fishing industry, such as marine technological research or supply and logistics of fish transport? Also, has the author evaluated whether other investment firms have considered investing in tartfish processing plant? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with an assumption that the claim is more wishful thinking than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws due to the above mentioned reasons. It could be considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned all the relevant facts, such as numbers of different kinds of fish caught, unaffected population growth of fish and other areas of investment opportunity in the fishing industry. In order to assess the claim that the investment firm should invest in tartfish processing plant, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Moderators:
