On average, middle‐aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail

The argument claims that The Excelsior Company will introduce a new brand of coffee on market. As the coffee market is expensive and very competitive, Excelsior had to adopt a similar marketing strategy like a leading competitor. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing and incomplete.

First, the beginning of the passage assumes that in order to experience a great success with its new brand of coffee. Excelsior has to copy the marketing strategy of an important competitor. This statement is a stretch as it does not provide any information about Excelsior's situation on the coffee market. Moreover, the author does not explain why such strategy would be effective in the case of Excelsior. We can take the example of Apple. a leading smartphone company. If we imagine that Apple was about to create TV set and home cinema -like Samsung or Sony-, nobody could say that Apple would experience success or failure. More precisely, Apple is not known as a TV producer, but as a hardware producer and seller. Therefore, it might be irrelevant for Apple to use the same strategy of leading competitors as Apple does not benefit from the same reputation in this specific area. Actually, it would be better for Apple to develop first its image in the TV set area before copying Sony's or Samsung's strategy. In brief, we can say that the first claim is unconvincing as the author does not provided any piece of background about Excelsior. Therefore, the reader cannot assess if such marketing strategy would be effective in the case of Excelsior Company. The argument would have been clearer if it had stated that such strategy was the fittest in the case of Excelsior.

Second, the argument asserts that the marketing strategy consists in offering free samples, introducing promotions etc. This is again an unsupported claim as it does not demonstrate any correlation between a discount strategy and the success of a new brand. We can consider the example of Nespresso. Nespresso represents a luxuary brand or coffee and is very successful thanks to its free samples. More precisely, when you go to a Nesspresso shop and when you buy Nespresso's coffe, then employees offer you a free cup of coffee. So we can conclude that Nespresso success is based on the good atmosphere created in their shops. Nevertheless, people are able to get free samples only when they buy. On the contrary, it is really hard to say if Nespresso would have been as successful as it is if it has provided free samples for non-buyers people. Therefore, Excelsior's success with promotion cannot be guaranted as the Nespresso's example is exactly the opposite situation. If the argument had provided some statistical data or evidence that the more a company makes promotion the more sales increase, then it would have been much more convincing.

Finally, some additional information would have strengthened the argument. As explained before, providing information about Excelsior's background could have help to understand the company's situation, and so to determine what strategy was the fittest in this situation. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of marketing campaign would have helped the reader to determine whether a promotion strategy is good or not, or if another strategy -such as Nespresso's- is better. Without any answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the argument is a wishful thinking rather than a substantiated argument. The claim would have been strengthened if it has mentioned one of the relevant facts cited before.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. Actually, in order to assess the merits of a decision, it is essential to have a full knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Hello! Can somebody please help me with the correction of my AWA Essay, please? it is the first one that i do, and it would be really helpful if somebody could correct it for me to see how can i improve in this matter.

The argument i used is this one:

“On average, middle‐aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle‐aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle‐ aged consumer.”

And my essay is the following:

"This argument shown above is flawed for several reasons. First of all, the argument is based on the assumption that the results of the study cited is correct, the author also assumes that people who are now younger than the middle-aged will behave exactly as middle-aged consumers behave now. This takes the author of the argument to conclude that stores should focus on products intended to attract the middle-aged consumers more, which is actually an invalid conclusion.

The author fails to provide any support of his data, it is assumed that the numbers of the study used in this argument give valid information to jump into conclusions, we do not know for sure if the study used a representative sample, or how many people were asked for the study, for example. If the author gave this kind of information supporting the data he is using, it would strengthen the credibility of the study, and thus, the argument as a whole.

The argument assumes that people behave similarly throughout the years, he takes as a fact that people who are now younger will buy the same products as the middle-aged consumers when they get to that same age. The author makes the assumption that tastes don’t change when years pass and that is actually wrong, trends and people taste change throughout the years.

Even if taste did not change with time, the conclusion of replacing products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumers, so that younger people would buy those kind of products when they grow up is invalid, doing this could actually have negative consequences in the future, possibly meaning that when younger consumers get to the middle age, they will not be interested in those products, because they were never considered as a target when they were young.

Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing conclusion for retailers to focus on products intended to attract more middle-aged consumers and not younger consumers."

Thank you in advance!!!

Please evaluate my essay, point out my errors and suggest the required corrections.

The following appeared in the opinion column of a financial magazine.

“On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.


The argument claims that departmental stores should begin replacing some of those products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumers. The conclusion of the argument is based on the premise that the number of middle-aged people people will increase dramatically within the next decade, and hence departmental stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly during the next decade. Stated in this way, the argument reveals leap of faith, poor reasoning. Furthermore, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. 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 cites the numerical record without providing any additional details about population and profits from both the younger people and the middle-aged people. In order to decide whether to increase inventory for middle-aged people and decrease the inventory for younger people, or not, we need to have more details. There might be a scenario opposite to the opinion of the author. For example, a significantly greater profits from the expenditure of younger people than the profits from the expenditure of middle-aged people can direct us to increase the inventory for younger people and decrease the inventory for middle-aged group people. Thus, the cited record is not enough to decide what to do about the inventory. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated the profits from the expenditure of both younger people and middle-aged people.

Second, the argument readily assumes that the department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly in the near future. Just relying on the increase in population of the middle-aged people in the near future, which too has not any substantive evidence, it is completely illogical to expect that the sales of department stores is certainly going to increase. The present record does not truly reflect its continuation in all forms in the near future. However, there are several retail market indicators that affect the decision of a customer. Will the middle-aged people continue to devote their expenditure to department store in the near future? Is there any choice of better and economical departmental stores available in the retail market? Will the economic conditions in the near future favor the middle-aged people to buy products and services of department stores? Without answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than a substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons. Hence, the argument is disputed and indefensible. It could have been considerably strengthened if the author would have provided all the sufficient and necessary information to support the claim. Without these information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Hi, Can anyone please evaluate my passage too? It would be really helpful! Thanks in advance!
GMATNinja KapTeacherEli

"On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer."

The author in the given passage argues that since currently, middle-aged consumers spend a larger part of their retail expenditure to departmental store products and services than younger consumers do, it is expected that departmental store sales will increase as the number of middle-aged consumers will increase dramatically within the next decade. The author bases his conclusion on assumptions without concrete evidences and until the logical fallacies are addressed, the argument remains weak and logically unsound.

First, the author asserts that since, currently, middle-aged consumers spend a greater part of their retail spending on departmental store products than younger consumers do, it is expected to happen in future too. This claim is flawed as it assumes that if an event has occurred in the past, it will happen in the future too. The author does not provide any evidence that establishes the reasons why it is reasonable to expect that the retail spending trend will be the same in the next decade too. In order to strengthen the argument, the author must provide further evidence that would support the expected retail spending trend in the two consumer groups.

Second, the author compares what proportion of retail expenditure is devoted to departmental store by the two consumer groups. However, this comparison is a weak premise to base the argument on, as it only compares the proportion of retail expenditure and not the absolute value. It is possible that 25 percent of younger consumers’ retail expenditure is greater than 39 percent of middle-aged consumers’ retail expenditure. If this is true then the argument would not hold good. So, to further strengthen the argument, the author must provide additional information on the absolute value of expenditure by the two groups.

Finally, in the anticipation of dramatic increase in middle-aged consumers within the next decade, the author asserts that the stores should begin replacing products meant for younger consumers with that for middle-aged consumers to take advantage of this trend. This plan is seriously flawed because the ultimate objective of the store would be to maximize its sale and profit, but if this plan is implemented, then it is quite possible that the stores would lose their current younger consumers and thus impact the business at present. To address this vulnerability, the author must suggest an alternative plan that would not drive away the present consumers, but is in line with the anticipation at the same time.

To conclude, the passage currently suffers from the above-mentioned serious flaws – expecting the past trend to carry on to the future, inadequate comparison of spending proportion, and advice to replace products, which could hurt the present sales. Until the above-mentioned flaws are addressed and additional information is provided to support the assumptions, the argument stays vulnerable to being weak and unsound as it currently stands.

Hi, could you rate my essay as well? Thanks in advance.

“On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer.”


The argument claims that because on an average, middle-aged consumers devote a higher percentage of their retail expenditure to department store products and services than younger consumers do and because the number of middle-aged people will increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect sales to increase significantly during that period. Basing on the aforementioned facts, the argument further claims that to take advantage of the trend, such stores should begin to replace some products intended to attract the younger consumers with products intended to attract middle-aged consumers. These claims and conclusions, however, are a stretch as the argument fails to mention several key factors that would help bridge the gap between the facts and the claim, conveying a distorted view of the situation.

Firstly, the connection between the claim that the department stores will witness an increase in sales during the 10-year period and the fact that the number of middle-aged people will increase in the next 10 years is a long haul. Multiple facts must be assumed to arrive from the given premise to the conclusion drawn by the argument. The argument readily, without warrant, assumes that the trend that middle-aged consumers devote a higher percentage of their retail expenditure to department store products and services than younger consumers do is going to continue for the 10-year period in consideration. Furthermore, the argument states, as a fact, that the percentage of expenditure devoted to department store products and services is higher for middle-aged consumers than for younger consumers, however, that the absolute expenditure on department store products and services may be higher for younger consumers than for middle-aged consumers is a possibility.

Secondly, the argument further recommends that replacing some products intended to attract younger customers with products intended to attract middle-aged consumers would help the stores take full advantage of the trend. This recommendation, however, has no legs to stand on without knowledge of all the contributing factors. For instance, a case in which young customers start devoting a higher percentage as well as a higher absolute dollar value to department store products and service, the department stores, rather than gaining from the trend, would start losing customers as they may no longer be well stocked to serve their major customer base.

In summary, the argument has twigs for legs to stand on and is therefore vulnerable to debate. The argument is therefore rendered unconvincing because of the aforementioned possibilities and reasons. To assess the merit of a situation, it is ideal to have knowledge of all contributing factors, however, in this particular case, many such factors have been omitted from consideration.