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 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 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 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.
rishabhsingla
Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Last visit: 31 Jul 2012
Posts: 70
Own Kudos:
Status:Labor Omnia Vincit
Concentration: Industrial, Marketing, Operations, Strategy
Schools:S3 Asia MBA (Fudan University, Korea University, National University of Singapore)
Q49 V44
WE 1: Market Research
WE 2: Consulting
WE 3: Iron & Steel Retail/Trading
Products:
Updated on: 05 Oct 2010, 11:04
Originally posted by rishabhsingla on 14 Sep 2010, 09:41.
Last edited by rishabhsingla on 05 Oct 2010, 11:04, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by rishabhsingla on 05 Oct 2010, 11:04, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
The stimulus, a part of Kaplan Premier's Online Writing Practice, was embedded in the Flash document and couldn't be copied, but I guess it should be clear from the first paragraph. Thank a ton in advance!
*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
14 Sep 2010, 21:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
rishabhsingla
The stimulus, a part of Kaplan Premier's Online Writing Practice, was embedded in the Flash document and couldn't be copied, but I guess it should be clear from the first paragraph. Thank a ton in advance!
*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
I would also say compare the extra cost vs similar water with minerals at lower cost.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
I am not sure about giving yogurts and also other non-water items as a counter since you are comparing water to non-water products. And i am not sure having bacteria in water is really appetizing even if it is good... I would argue if they have proof - is it 100% bacteria free? also exactly what percent of bacteria exist in other water - if it is 98% vs 99% it might not justify the price.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
i am not sure if you got the argument correct.. Basically the company says people dont get sick where the water is bottled but you are arguing the cleanliness of the factory which is ireelevant. I think you need to justify why the residents are "healthier" just because the water is bottled there. The microorganisms has nothing to do with it unless all people drink the water there which is probably not true...
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
I would also say compare the extra cost vs similar water with minerals at lower cost.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
I am not sure about giving yogurts and also other non-water items as a counter since you are comparing water to non-water products. And i am not sure having bacteria in water is really appetizing even if it is good... I would argue if they have proof - is it 100% bacteria free? also exactly what percent of bacteria exist in other water - if it is 98% vs 99% it might not justify the price.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
i am not sure if you got the argument correct.. Basically the company says people dont get sick where the water is bottled but you are arguing the cleanliness of the factory which is ireelevant. I think you need to justify why the residents are "healthier" just because the water is bottled there. The microorganisms has nothing to do with it unless all people drink the water there which is probably not true...
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
15 Sep 2010, 13:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
rishabhsingla
The stimulus, a part of Kaplan Premier's Online Writing Practice, was embedded in the Flash document and couldn't be copied, but I guess it should be clear from the first paragraph. Thank a ton in advance!
*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
Strengths: Excellent organization!*****************************
The given argument concludes that Clear-One Bottled Water is a good long-term investment, despite its higher cost compared to other bottled water brands available, because Clear-One contains many minerals that are good for the health and it is free of bacteria. The argument provides additional evidence in the form of a statistic that residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average. The given argument makes several questionable assumptions which undermine its persuasiveness. In this discussion, I am going to list three weaknesses that the argument suffers from, and the changes that would make the argument more convincing and more logical.
First, the argument assumes that presence of many minerals that are good for the health justifies the extra cost of Clear-One. The argument does not provide necessary evidence comparing the amount of minerals in Clear-One to the amount of minerals in other bottled water brands. For example, if research revealed that alternative bottled water products available in the market contain equal or higher amount of health-friendly minerals than are present in Clear-One, the argument's conclusion would fail to hold. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided evidence comparing mineral content in Clear-One to the mineral content in competitor's products.
Second, the argument attempts to justify the extra cost of Clear-One by asserting that Clear-One is totally free of bacteria. With this assertion, the argument makes a questionable assumption that every bacteria is bad for health. The argument does not take into account that some products on the market, such as bio-yoghurts, advertize presence of digestion-friendly bacteria as a key selling point. The argument would have been more persuasive if it provided additional evidence that the absence of any bacteria in Clear-One is indeed more helpful to the consumer's health than alternative products are.
Finally, the argument makes an assumption that if the residents of the area where the water is bottled get sick less frequently compared to the national average, this somehow indicates that Clear-One is free of harmful microorganisms. The argument fails to provide evidence regarding cleanliness of the actual factory where water is produced for Clear-One and the processes that are followed at the bottling plant. For example, the argument would fall apart if it is revealed that the processes in use at the bottling plant result in contamination of the plant environment. It will be helpful to have evidence regarding the correlation between the bottling area and the purity of Clear-One.
In summary, the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to be logically convincing. The argument suffers from at least three questionable assumptions, and additional evidence that makes these assumptions more acceptable would strengthen the argument's conclusion, that Clear-One is justifiably priced more than competitor products.
I liked the 'yogurt' part; very clever example.
Clear, grammatically correct writing.
Opportunities: Avoid starting your essay with 'the argument'. GMAT prompt usually tell you who made the argument; better "An argument made by a marketing firm..." or such. Also, avoid needlessly referencing your self. Don't TELL me you are going to undermine the argument, just do it!
Vary your language and style. You're overusing the work 'argument'. I count 16! uses of the word. In addition, many of your sentences use the structure "the argument <VERB>", repeated not just verbiage but sentence structure.
Overall grade: 5. This is a well reasoned, well structured, grammatically correct essay. However, the repetitive language holds it back from getting a top score.
