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.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
23 Nov 2006, 11:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Hi Folks,
Here is a AWA topic in Kaplan "Businesses should support their local communities by purchasing goods and services from Local vendors whenever possible.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience. Observation, and reading
Here is my response. Can somebody help me critique this issue essay ?
Author concludes that businesses should support their local communities by purchasing goods and services from local vendors whenever possible as this helps the local economy and is beneficial for local vendors. Author however fails to realize the negative effects of this idea. Businesses only supporting local vendors promote monopoly and create an environment that would negatively effect local community. I strongly disagree with author’s conclusion for below reasons.
By supporting local vendors only, Local community looses the extra benefit they receive from innovation and creativity from non local vendors. In this day and age, The business world is extremely competitive. Companies that are coming to top are using innovation and creativity as their weapons to win customers. For example, Korean company Hundyai gives 10 years/100,000 warranty on its car. If the local community is asked to purchase only ford cars because Ford motor company has a plant in the community, wouldn’t this cause consumers to loose out on best warranty they can receive by buying a Korean car ?
Secondly, this approach will likely cause inflation to the products and services provided by local vendors . As Vendors do not have competitors, they will raise the price high for their products and services. This again hurts the local community.
On the contrary , I do see few benefits from authors conclusion . By supporting local businesses , this gives local businesses the opportunity to become creative and create unique product and services that is a specaility of the community. For example, Tourism industry is hot in Hawaii. The products and services provided by local businesses are quite profitable because they are unique and tourists love to get a taste of local culture and support local businesses. However , the disadvantages of author’s approach outweighs advantages hence, I would strongly disagree with authors point.
Here is a AWA topic in Kaplan "Businesses should support their local communities by purchasing goods and services from Local vendors whenever possible.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience. Observation, and reading
Here is my response. Can somebody help me critique this issue essay ?
Author concludes that businesses should support their local communities by purchasing goods and services from local vendors whenever possible as this helps the local economy and is beneficial for local vendors. Author however fails to realize the negative effects of this idea. Businesses only supporting local vendors promote monopoly and create an environment that would negatively effect local community. I strongly disagree with author’s conclusion for below reasons.
By supporting local vendors only, Local community looses the extra benefit they receive from innovation and creativity from non local vendors. In this day and age, The business world is extremely competitive. Companies that are coming to top are using innovation and creativity as their weapons to win customers. For example, Korean company Hundyai gives 10 years/100,000 warranty on its car. If the local community is asked to purchase only ford cars because Ford motor company has a plant in the community, wouldn’t this cause consumers to loose out on best warranty they can receive by buying a Korean car ?
Secondly, this approach will likely cause inflation to the products and services provided by local vendors . As Vendors do not have competitors, they will raise the price high for their products and services. This again hurts the local community.
On the contrary , I do see few benefits from authors conclusion . By supporting local businesses , this gives local businesses the opportunity to become creative and create unique product and services that is a specaility of the community. For example, Tourism industry is hot in Hawaii. The products and services provided by local businesses are quite profitable because they are unique and tourists love to get a taste of local culture and support local businesses. However , the disadvantages of author’s approach outweighs advantages hence, I would strongly disagree with authors point.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
23 Nov 2006, 12:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. Your thesis sentence is very weak. It says: "Businesses only supporting local vendors promote monopoly and create an environment that would negatively effect (should be affect) local community." -- Issue suggests that local businesses should buy from local vendors "whenever possible". There is no compulsion that they must have to buy from local vendors; therefore, monopoly is out of question. Moreover, there could be several local businesses competing with each other. In that case "monopoly" is out of question as well.
2. "By supporting local vendors only, Local community looses (should be loses) the extra benefit they receive from innovation and creativity from non local vendors." -- This also doesn't address the "whenever possible" condition. When local vendors are not providing sufficient advantage, businesses may not use them at all. Moreover, big global corporations such as Ford or GM are not really "local vendors". The example is very weak. It doesn't suggest how just a better warranty can be a good reason to buy a foreign made car. Please note that a warranty is just a promise. It doesn't have any tangible value. It doesn't ensure superior performance of a car.
3. " Secondly, this approach will likely cause inflation to the products" -- If local vendors start charging more, by law of economics and free market, their product will be replaced by cheaper out of station products. Please note again that promoting local vendors is just an option and not a law. Causing "inflation" is little too much to believe. Please do not use these economic terms loosely.
4. Your last para is more convincing than your previous paras. However, please do not use too informal sentences such as "Tourism industry is hot in Hawaii". Replace it by something more formal such as "Tourism industry is booming in Hawaii".
2. "By supporting local vendors only, Local community looses (should be loses) the extra benefit they receive from innovation and creativity from non local vendors." -- This also doesn't address the "whenever possible" condition. When local vendors are not providing sufficient advantage, businesses may not use them at all. Moreover, big global corporations such as Ford or GM are not really "local vendors". The example is very weak. It doesn't suggest how just a better warranty can be a good reason to buy a foreign made car. Please note that a warranty is just a promise. It doesn't have any tangible value. It doesn't ensure superior performance of a car.
3. " Secondly, this approach will likely cause inflation to the products" -- If local vendors start charging more, by law of economics and free market, their product will be replaced by cheaper out of station products. Please note again that promoting local vendors is just an option and not a law. Causing "inflation" is little too much to believe. Please do not use these economic terms loosely.
4. Your last para is more convincing than your previous paras. However, please do not use too informal sentences such as "Tourism industry is hot in Hawaii". Replace it by something more formal such as "Tourism industry is booming in Hawaii".
24 Nov 2006, 09:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Thanks alot , Really appreciate the critique. I am going to change the format and try again.
