Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70

Sajjad1994 pls review my response, thanks!

The article first presents the fact that although a foreign company has reproduced a similar and cheaper motorcycle, it has been unable to attract cusotmers of motorcycle X. Although some people suggest the inability of the company to attract X's customers is due to the fact that its motorcycle lacks the exceptionally loud noise that X makes, the argument concludes that there must be some other explanation. This argument relies on several assumptions and fails to consider other factors necessary in reaching its conclusion; it is therefore, flawed, weak, and unconvincing.

First the argument is flawed because it compares the sales of cars to those of motorcycles. The author presents that although foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American cars, they still sell as well. However, the car and the motorcycle, although both vehicles, are not the same type of vehicle and should not be compared in this argument because customers may consider different factors when considering a car and other factors for considering a motorcycle. On one hand, customers who are purchasing cars may prefer noiseless cars, while motorocycle customers would prefer loud motorocycles. The argument could be made clearer by showing that people make similar considerations when purchasing cars as when purchasing motorcycles.

In addition, the argument is flawed because it posits that since the manufacturers of motorcycle X do not highlight X's noisiness in their ads which contain voice-overs or rock musinc and not en engine roar, there must be another explantion for why the foreign company has not been able to lure customers of motorcycle X. This reasoning is flawed because it draws a vague and unconvincing relationship between ads for motorcycle X and the attractiveness of the foreign company's motorcycle. As the article mentions, X has been produced for 70 years therefore, there may already be significant brand recognition such that customers know the noisiness of the motorcycle and need not be reminded by advertisements. Hence, X's manufacturers may see it as a waste of resources to create ads that highlight the engine-roar of their product. The argument could be made more convincing if it established a clearer relationship between the advertisements for motorcycle X and the inability of the foreign company to attract X's customers.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the aforementioned reasons. It could be significantly strengthed by corroborating its assumptions and by establishing more cogent relationships between factors mentioned in the article. However, because the argument fails to do so it is flawed and unconvincing and is open to debate.

Hi Sajjad1994! Can you please help me vet my response to this AWA? Many thanks in advance.

The arguments states that the 70-year-old motorcycle X has failed to attract customers because its products lack the exceptionally loud noise. Additionally, the article falsely compares foreign cars, which sell at least as well, to similar American-made cars. The author goes on to mention that the ads of motorcycle X fails to highlight its noisiness; instead, the ads typically use voice-overs or rock music.

First, target customers of motorcycle are different from that of cars. While the majority of car-owners prioritise safety and comfort of a vehicle, owners of motorcycles may prefer flashiness and speed of motorbike. It would be incorrect to compare the sale of foreign cars in the first argument to the sale of motorbikes produced by the brand.

Second, the argument assumes without explaining why the customers prefer loud noise over other factors. Target customers of motorcycle X may consider the functionality, price and branding of a product, rather than solely taking into account the sound that it makes. Without explanation and further evidence, it is hard to support the claim that sound is the only deciding factor that potential customer would consider.

Finally, the author’s second argument concerning the lack of loud noise of motorcycle X’s products showing on TV ads does not consider the possibility that potential customers may not be an active TV user. For example, many motorcycle manufacturers nowadays have switched from traditional TV advertisement to social media platforms such as TikTok or Instagram to accommodate their target customers who are commonly browsing those channels. If the argument has considered how loud noise plays a role in attracting potential customers in new forms of advertisements, it would have been more convincing.

In conclusion, if the author can provide concrete arguments on why loud noise plays a critical role in motorcycle sale over other factors, a more thorough analysis with a comparable competitor, and whether motorcycle ads with loud noise attracts more viewership on platforms used commonly by its target customers, it will enhance the strength of the argument.

Sajjad1994 please evaluate

The argument claims that the reason behind the faded sales of the foreign company's motocycle, which is the replica of Motorcycle X, can't be the absence of the loud noise that is present in Motorcycle X. The conclusion of the argument is based on the premise that compared to American-made cars, the foreign made cars are quiter and sell well. The conclusion of the argument is based on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument has mentioned that the television advertisements of motorcycle X doesn't feature the loud noise made by model X, and these ads generall have a voice overs that mask the engine roar of the motorcycle. However, the arguement has totally ignored the fact that the motocycle has been in the market for more than 70 years , and its a well know motorcycle brand. So, even if the ads don't have the loud engine roar of the motorcycle X, it is a well know fact to the public that the model X is noisy. In such situtation, there is some other solid evidence needed in order to properly draw the conclusion.

Second, the argument has stated that the foreign company is selling the replica motocycle for less than the price of motorcycle X. The argument has assumed without any evidence that cost is a major factor when it comes to purchasing the motorcycle, especially motorcycle X. It can be true that motorcycle X has a very loyal customer base and the most attractive thing that these customers find about motorcycle X is its loud noise. In such a case, the conclusion of the argument will fall apart.

Finally, the argument has compared the foreign cars with similar American-made cars and has stated that these foreign made cars generally sell well. However, it is possible that the things that are applicable for cars are generally not applicable for the motorcycles. It is possible that the general public prefers quite cars but prefers loud motorcycles. If this is the case then tha lack of loud noise in the replica model has to be the major factor behind lousy sales of the motorcycle. So based upon this fact we can't conclude anything.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is thus unconvincing. Based on the given premises we can't conclude that the absence of the loud noise in the replica of motorcycle X can't be the reason behind low sales of the replica motorcycle. Without any further knowledge and data, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open for debate.

Sajjad1994 Please review, thanks.

In this argument, the author discusses about the reason for low sales of a foreign company’s motorcycle that is a clone of motorcycle X. The author tries to explain why the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X is not the reason for its relatively higher sales. The argument makes a lot of assumptions and is unconvincing and incomplete.

First, the comparison cited of sales of foreign and American cars is not justified. The factors involved in the purchase of cars and motorcycles vary and it is unfair to extrapolate the data of car sales to motorcycle sales. As the demographics of potential customers of cars and motorcycles differ, the preferences and criteria for purchase are likely to be different as well. Hence, this analogy is not well supported by data.

Second, the argument wrongly correlates the product features cited in the television advertisements of motorcycle X and customer preferences. This is a flawed assumption. Just because the advertisement highlights durability and sleek lines of the motorcycle, it would be wrong to assume that the customers do not buy motorcycle X because of the loud noise. Television advertisements are usually very short in duration, and it is not possible to highlight all the features in one advertisement.

Furthermore, the argument fails to provide relevant data about precise specifications of the foreign motorcycle that has been copied from motorcycle X. For example, while the argument mentions that the foreign model lacks the exceptionally loud noise of motorcycle X, this information would have been easier to evaluate if provided in unit of decibels.


In conclusion, the argument is vague and does not provide solid grounds for dismissing the importance of the loud noise of motorcycle X in attracting customers, and in turn, boosting sales. The author can strengthen this argument by provided detailed and comparable specifications of both motorcycles so that the precise differences may be identified. Also, a customer survey with the relevant demographic of potential customers can also help resolve the issue.

Hi, can someone similarly grade my essay as well:-
---------


The argument that Motorcycle X sells more than its cheaper lookalikes from a foreign brand because of its "exceptionally loud noise" seems flimsy. This rationale is cited to "some" individuals, but their relationship or credibility is never established in the article. For instance, are these opinions from customers who chose Motorcycle X over its cheaper less noisy alternative? Or, is it the result of some poll conducted over a significant sample size?
Had the credibility of sources that expressed this line of argument ( noisy vs silent ) been made clear, the above explanation would be less refutable.
Similarly, considering the brand "Motorcycle X" has been around for the past 70 years, how does its access through its stores compare with the relatively new and cheaper foreign brand?
An emphasis or data point on these lines could provide further clarity on the disparity in sales numbers.
Overall, the explanation for this non-intuitive customer behaviour (choosing an expensive alternative )is supported by a rather weak line of argument. Data on:-
1. Brand recognition and its relevance to bike owners. How important is "Motorcycle X" as a brand, over any other bike?
2. Number of stores and after-sales support for the brands

Such data sets would provide concrete and irrefutable arguments explaining such customer behaviour better than it has been, in the quoted paragraph.

Hi Sajjad1994
could you kindly rate my essay as below and suggest the improvement areas.
Many Thanks in advance!

Argument states that Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years and one foreign company, which copied the motorcycle X and is selling it for less, has failed to attract motorcycle X customers. Further author mentioned that some people state that lack of exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X is one reason. But author mentioned that there must be some other explanation because foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars but they sell at least as well, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine-roar on the sound track. However, argument is rife with assumptions rather unconvincing for below stated reasons.

Firstly, author mentioned that the foreign company copied the motor cycle X and is selling it for less price but has failed to attract motorcycle x customers. But author failed to provide more data supporting this conclusion. In the absence of statistics about sale of motor cycle X and sale of foreign company's motor cycle, it is difficult to analyze this conclusion and argument.

Secondly, Author compared the foreign company's motor cycle with foreign company's car and assumed that making less sound should not be the reason of failure to attract customers for motor cycle. Here author is comparing two different things as target customers for car may be different from motor cycle. For example: families prefer car over motor cycle and individual or solo travelers prefer motor cycle for short trip. Therefore to enable a better analysis author need to provide data of comparable item.

Finally, author mentioned that television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and therefore assumed that it indicates that motor cycle noise-ness is not unique quality of the motor cycle X but in the absence of more data, this assumption is unconvincing as practice of advertisement company may not be the right way to analyze the qualities of the product.

To sum, basis above stated reasons, we can conclude that argument is flawed and unconvincing. To bolster the argument, author would have provided more data about the sale of motor cycle X and foreign company's motor cycle. Further to compare progress of foreign company motor cycle, author should have taken a comparable product (not Car) which should have same customer base. Also author failed to provide data which is needed to support the assumption taken by author basis the advertisement. However, in the absence of above, argument remains unconvincing.

Hi Sajjad1994, can you evaluate my essay please!

“Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers - some say because its products lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine roar on the sound track.”


The argument that the author presents is that Motorcycle X’s customers have not moved to the firm copying motorbike x because the copy motorcycle does not copy the noise made by motorcycle X and suggests that this can’t be the case because the adverts for motorcycle X’s adverts highlight its durability and sleek lines and so can’t be the noise. The argument fails to account for two reasons why motorcycle x’s customers haven’t moved to the cheaper option. Brand loyalty and the availability of spare parts.

Motorcycle X may have very strong brand loyalty. Consumers may have developed a loyalty and could be have been customers since the past 50 years. As a result they may have developed a brand loyalty and hence even though the competition may offer a cheaper alternative, they still may not switch.

Another reason, why consumers may not have switched is because motorcycle X may already have an established set of spare parts. As a result, even though the alternative may offer a cheaper version, consumers may not switch as there may be a limited number of parts for this newer cheaper motorcycle. Furthermore, as Motorcycle X has been manufactured for over 70 years there will a lot of spare parts available hence why consumers may not switch.

In conclusion, the author fails to account for other reason apart from noise, durability and sleek lines that suggest why consumers didn’t swap to the cheaper alternative. These reasons are brand loyalty and availability of parts.

Sajjad1994 , Please rate the below response to the above mentioned question.

The given argument is trying to explore the reasons for a foreign company's failure to attract customers for a copied and cheaper version of particular motorcycle X. The author says that some people claim Lack of high noise to be the main reason for sales but then dismisses the claim with 3 reasons:
1) Foreign cars are generally also quieter than their American counterparts but sell at least as well
2) TV ads highlight durability and sleek lines rather than noisiness
3) Ads typically have voiceovers or rock music rather than engine roar on the sound track

The argument seems to be lacking credibility because the assertions made are too generalised for such a specific claim.
There are three fundamental reasons to explain this. Firstly, author correlates the sales and features of car to sales and feature of a motorcycle. It might be possible that the features expectations of customer segment of cars is quite different than that of motorcycle. Noise may be a preferred feature in motorcycle but not in cars.

Secondly, author's assumption of TV ads to be a major marketing channel for bike's customer segment is a little far fetched and ill supported because people who buy bikes always takes test drives and would then know about the sounds not evident in the ads. Additionally, TV ads could infact be a small part of marketing activities for motorcycle companies. Other channels like roadshows, mouth to mouth marketing, influencer review videos might constitute a significant chunk of marketing endeavors.

Lastly author makes a casual assumption that for such a successful product which has been around for 70 years, in a market with very few competitors and with such a niche audience, people would not already be aware of noisiness of these models and would depend on ads for that information

Hence to effectively evaluate the argument and make it more logically sound, author could present some research or concrete evidence supporting that just like car, noisiness is not a requirement for motorcycles or a market research could be conducted among bike enthusiasts to find out how much bike noise matters to them.

Next we can look at the various other effective marketing channels these 2 bike companies employ and whether sound is evident in these channels.

Hi Sajjad1994 Can you please review my essay. Thanks in advance


The writer starts the article with the description of two motorcycle companies and highlights that one of the motorcycle companies has recently entered the market but has failed to attract customers despite the low cost of its motorcycle. The writer further iterates a view that the failure to attract customers might be due to the lack of exceptionally loud noise that motorcycle X, which has manufactured for over 70 years, makes. The writer goes on to express disagreement with this view by citing two reasons. One, the foreign cars are quieter than similar American cars, but still sell as well as American cars do. Secondly, Motorcycle X is advertised for its sleek lines and durability rather than it's noise. The writer's view might be is not based full information and the article lacks important information to be certain why the new motorcycle sells less than expected.

Firstly, the writer of this article compares the market for bike with the market of cars. By citing that the foreign cars,even though they are quieter, tend to sell as well as the American cars do, the writer assumes that the customer segment for cars and bikes are different. Even though the fundamental usage of both the vehicles, that is trasportation, is same, the uses of cars and bikes is very different due to changes in seating capacitty, storage, mileage and skill required for riding. It would be illogical to compare the bike market with the car market.

Secondly, we need to have more information regarding the differences in mileage,durability, any status symbol that bike carries and other factors for both the bikes to reach the conclusion that its only because of noisiness that motorcycle X sells better. For example If there is no status symbol of luxury that motorcycle X carries, and all other things are same as well then we can be sure that noisiness is the differentiating factor because of which new motorcycle sells less.

Thirdly, even though the advertisement of motorcycle X does not show any roaring sounds of the bike. The noisiness can be implied through other signs in the advertisement. If the ads have voiceovers with rock music, it may signify the rigidness that the bike can endure and thus development such a bike with exceptionally lound noise might be a notion embedded in the customer's mind.

Hence, the writer makes a few flawed assumptions while writing the article which makes it difficult for one to agree with the writer's conclusion. Unless and until, the writer provides further details about the new bike, clarifies that there are no implied meanings in the advertisements and gives a strong evidence how the market segment of cars and bikes is comparable, the argument remains flawed and conclusion remains uncertain.