It is currently 27 Jun 2017, 11:03

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Posts: 7

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2011, 12:40
Hello,

Could someone evaluate my first essay, please?

ANALYSIS OF AN ARGUMENT

"Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day sevice in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimaze costs and thus maximaize profits."

The argument claims that the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become mor efficient. Hence, the Olympic Foods can expect that their long experience will enable them to minimaize cost and maximaize profits as the company will soon celebrate its 25th birthday. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that over time all companies learn how to do things better and become more efficient. From this argument it is possible to assume that all the companies in the world should become more efficient in time. However, in reality there are thousands of companies bankruptying every year no matter how old they are.

Second, the argument brings an example to illustrate the point that over time, the costs of processing go down as organisations learn how to do things better. In my opinion the example is too general. The argument does not explain what was the actual reason for such improvements. The improvement in color film processing was maybe because of technological improvement and due to high competition not because of time. In addition, it is not possible to understand whether company's A processing improved or competitors provided cheaper and faster service in 1984.

Finally, the argument concludes that the author expects Olympic Foods to minimaize its costs and to maximaize its profits. The argument does not support this idea as there is no proof that minimaizing processing costs will result in maximaizing profits. Without supporting evidence and examples from other companies, one is left with impression that the argument is more of a wishfu thinking. As a result, this conlusion has no legs to stand on.

In summary, the argument is flawed and thefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author brought more evidence and concrete examples to support its conclusion.
Intern
Joined: 14 Aug 2011
Posts: 7

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2011, 04:40

I would really appreciate if someone could bring out my mistakes so that I could focus some time to remove them.
Intern
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 3

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2011, 23:07
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
“In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of office and reelected Varro.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

The aforementioned argument, in asserting that the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of the office and reelected Varro, appears to be a coherent and a fairly convincing argument at first glance. However, upon further examination of the argument and its underlying structure, a number flaws can be noticed in author’s approach to address the issue. Among the most pivotal shortcomings are its inability to address its assumptions and lack of information to substantiate its claims.
To begin with, the author assumes that unemployment rate and population are the only two factors to judge a candidate’s ability to be a mayor and to serve the city at best. The author is wrong in this assumption as it fails to consider any other factor responsible for current scenario of the city. It might be that during Montoya’s tenure, population among employed class is decreasing and ultimately contributing to unemployment rate. For instance, population of some city is 100 with 80 employed people and 20 unemployed people. Because of some reason like bird flu etc, 20 employed people died and unemployed people remain same, this scenario will result in decreased population and increased unemployment rate. The author also fails to consider any other factors during the Montoya’s tenure as a mayor which might have contributed in city’s development There can be many other factors like inflation, parallel indicators of the economy, leading or lagging indicators of the economy of the city etc. And the author fails to consider any such factor and makes such a broad conclusion.
The author also assumes that less the number of business, less is the city served at best. This assumption is flawed. It might be that number of large-scale industries are entering the market and establishing in the city, contributing to the decreased unemployment rate in long term. As number of business will be low, business will be run effectively and government will also be able to control such a limited number of businesses in the city because of less conflicting demands of competitors. It might be that during the tenure of earlier mayor, government was unable to control the number of businesses and which might have resulted in less number of projects to each business. And hence low wages to workers. This clearly shows that city was not served at its best. The author fails to consider any such possibility.

The argument, in its current state, contains a number of flaws, the most blatant of which have been discussed above. Had the argument managed to address the aforementioned concerns, both its persuasive ability and its apparent legitimacy would have been greatly reinforced, perhaps to such an extent that it would be difficult to refute. However, as it stands, the argument is simply a hasty generalization, filled with overreaching assumptions and deficiencies in information.

Please rate this, i'll appreciate your response.....don't have much time left for GMAT
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 23

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2011, 10:21
rhallik wrote:
Hello,

Could someone evaluate my first essay, please?

ANALYSIS OF AN ARGUMENT

"Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day sevice in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimaze costs and thus maximaize profits."

The argument claims that the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become mor efficient. Hence, the Olympic Foods can expect that their long experience will enable them to minimaize cost and maximaize profits as the company will soon celebrate its 25th birthday. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that over time all companies learn how to do things better and become more efficient. From this argument it is possible to assume that all the companies in the world should become more efficient in time. However, in reality there are thousands of companies bankruptying every year no matter how old they are.

Second, the argument brings an example to illustrate the point that over time, the costs of processing go down as organisations learn how to do things better. In my opinion the example is too general. The argument does not explain what was the actual reason for such improvements. The improvement in color film processing was maybe because of technological improvement and due to high competition not because of time. In addition, it is not possible to understand whether company's A processing improved or competitors provided cheaper and faster service in 1984.

Finally, the argument concludes that the author expects Olympic Foods to minimaize its costs and to maximaize its profits. The argument does not support this idea as there is no proof that minimaizing processing costs will result in maximaizing profits. Without supporting evidence and examples from other companies, one is left with impression that the argument is more of a wishfu thinking. As a result, this conlusion has no legs to stand on.

In summary, the argument is flawed and thefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author brought more evidence and concrete examples to support its conclusion.

Hello,

Well, good attempt on this ..It would be a good idea to read through your essay after you are done and correct the typos/spelling mistakes..Common examples I see are "minimaize ","maximaize ", "thefore " etc.

"However, in reality there are thousands of companies bankruptying " -> this is an incorrect statement. It should be "there are thousands of companies that are bankrupt"..

"the costs of processing go down " - should be "goes down"

Your analysis of the argument is ok, but there are many mistakes in sentence construction and spelling..Also, more arguments can be added against the case..Hope this helps..
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Please evaluate my essay. 0 03 Aug 2014, 12:10
Please evaluate my essay. 0 01 Aug 2014, 02:42
2 Please evaluate my essay 3 11 Jul 2014, 04:40
1 Please Evaluate my essay. 2 21 Jan 2013, 05:46
Please Evaluate my essay. 2 16 Jan 2013, 01:54
Display posts from previous: Sort by