|
|
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.
aishikdhar2006
Joined: 06 Apr 2017
Last visit: 21 Nov 2020
Posts: 22
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Location: India
Schools: Instead Sept 20 Intake (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V39
23 May 2017, 10:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi Everyone. Please help grade this AWA Essay that I have written. Please provide comments and please do finally tell me how much I would get out of 6. Thanks. 
ARGUMENT
’The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it - even though that amount is far more than any other person involved in the movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to work in several films that were very financially successful.’
Essay:
The column in the popular entertainment magazine states that the producers of the movie 3003 will maximize profits if they cast Robin Good in their movie. Under the premise that Robin Good has been a part of several films in which he has charged several million dollars and that those film were very financially successful, the magazine concludes the movie 3003 will be financially successful and hence maximize profits for its producers. Some of the assumptions that the magazine has assumed are weak and hence they weaken the conclusion as a whole.
First, the magazine fails to take into account the genre of movies and the kind of roles that Robin Good was paid high amounts for. Maybe the genre of those movies suited Robin Good and he is a good actor in such kind of roles. An muscular actor with little emotion can fit perfectly for an Action movie and the movie but be hugely successful at the theaters but the same actor might be dull and boring in a Romantic Comedy.
Second, the magazine assumes that Robin Good will be a better choice than the other lower-paid actors who are currently a part of the movie. This assumption is flawed because even though Robin Good is a well established actor in the industry, the other actor currently in his place might be a young artist who has recently come into the industry and is doing really well. Since he is young and new to the industry, he charges less. This might actually be a masterstroke from the producers who might enjoy the same amount of success with even lesser investment.
Third, the magazine only looks at those movies in which Robin acted and which were successful. It might be true that more movies of his were unsuccessful at the theaters than were successful. The ratio of unsuccessful movies might actually be exceptionally high. So, the producers might actually make a grave mistake in roping in Robin Good for the role.
So, even though the conclusion might actually hold true, clarifying these above assumptions can go a long way in helping evaluate and strenghtening the conclusion that the magazine reaches.
ARGUMENT
’The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it - even though that amount is far more than any other person involved in the movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to work in several films that were very financially successful.’
Essay:
The column in the popular entertainment magazine states that the producers of the movie 3003 will maximize profits if they cast Robin Good in their movie. Under the premise that Robin Good has been a part of several films in which he has charged several million dollars and that those film were very financially successful, the magazine concludes the movie 3003 will be financially successful and hence maximize profits for its producers. Some of the assumptions that the magazine has assumed are weak and hence they weaken the conclusion as a whole.
First, the magazine fails to take into account the genre of movies and the kind of roles that Robin Good was paid high amounts for. Maybe the genre of those movies suited Robin Good and he is a good actor in such kind of roles. An muscular actor with little emotion can fit perfectly for an Action movie and the movie but be hugely successful at the theaters but the same actor might be dull and boring in a Romantic Comedy.
Second, the magazine assumes that Robin Good will be a better choice than the other lower-paid actors who are currently a part of the movie. This assumption is flawed because even though Robin Good is a well established actor in the industry, the other actor currently in his place might be a young artist who has recently come into the industry and is doing really well. Since he is young and new to the industry, he charges less. This might actually be a masterstroke from the producers who might enjoy the same amount of success with even lesser investment.
Third, the magazine only looks at those movies in which Robin acted and which were successful. It might be true that more movies of his were unsuccessful at the theaters than were successful. The ratio of unsuccessful movies might actually be exceptionally high. So, the producers might actually make a grave mistake in roping in Robin Good for the role.
So, even though the conclusion might actually hold true, clarifying these above assumptions can go a long way in helping evaluate and strenghtening the conclusion that the magazine reaches.
Moderators:
188 posts
