Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 05:06

### 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
Your Progress

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

# Please Rate my AOA!

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 17

Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 May 2011, 21:10
KUDOS will be given to a well articulated, constructed criticism.

I should also mention that any critique will receive one back in kind.

Thanks in advance!

==============================================================================

The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper.”

AOA:

The argument claims that The Mercury should reduce the price below its competitor, the Bugle, in order to increase readership. It also claims that due to the speculated increased circulation, the Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper. This argument has many flaws and uses poor reasoning to justify such a drastic business decision. The Mercury fails to consider the quality and relevancy of the articles, competing sources of news, and the decision making process of the average newspaper buyer.

First, there is no mention in the argument as to the comparative quality and relevancy of the two paper's articles. This demonstrates that the Mercury staff may not grasp what the target population is looking for in terms of content, or what the average population is concerned with. For example, The San Jose Mercury News is a paper based in San Jose, California, the heart of silicon valley. The newspaper is aware that many of its readers want to see tech-related content, so that is what they focus on. The Mercury in this example has given no indication that they have understood what the target audience would like to read about. Clearly this is an area in which additional due diligence should be performed before arbitrarily changing the purchase price in hopes of increased readership.

Second, the argument assumes that there are no other sources of competition. Today, there are many sources to obtain news information from such as: the internet, twitter, blogs, television, etc. The argument does not consider that in the five year decline of 10,000 readers, some of those readers may have switched their primary sources of news to one of the examples listed above. The argument assumes that the only sources of news are either The Mercury or The Bugle. This is not realistic and fails to considers shifting consumer behavior based on evolving media types.
Finally, the argument dangerously assumes that the average consumer bases his or her purchase of a newspaper based on price alone. This is a large leap of faith that does not consider the fact that there are many consumers who pay a premium for premium quality reporting. Some examples of this may include the Wall Street Journal, a high quality, finance oriented paper, CNN and MSNBC, premium news stations available with the purchase of a cable package, and The Economist, a magazine publication dedicated to quality reporting on global economic issues. As many of the listed examples have a purchase price higher than "free", we see that consumers are willing to pay for quality journalism. To assume that price is the only factor in deciding purchase is flawed.

Finally, the argument dangerously assumes that the average consumer bases his or her purchase of a newspaper based on price alone. This is a large leap of faith that does not consider the fact that there are many consumers who pay a premium for premium quality reporting. Some examples of this may include the Wall Street Journal, a high quality, finance oriented paper, CNN and MSNBC, premium news stations available with the purchase of a cable package, and The Economist, a magazine publication dedicated to quality reporting on global economic issues. As many of the listed examples have a purchase price higher than "free", we see that consumers are willing to pay for quality journalism. To assume that price is the only factor in deciding purchase is flawed.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It may warrant additional consideration if the author had a well articulated argument based on data and facts. Without this information, the argument is unsubstantiated and weak.
 Economist GMAT Tutor Discount Codes Jamboree Discount Codes Veritas Prep GMAT Discount Codes
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
Posts: 449
Location: United States (DC)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.37
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 183 [0], given: 5

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2011, 10:42
I think it looks pretty good, the obvious exception is that you have the 'Finally' paragraph in there twice. Obvious mistakes like that could mean a significant difference in score.
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 17

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2011, 12:25
hah! so it is. dang. it was not like that in the original version - I guess I had copy and paste issues from the MGMAT to here. But yes, I would agree, it is a *tad* redundant :D
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 272
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 17

Re: Please Rate my AOA! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2011, 20:24
Hey all,

Full Debrief to anyone interested:
full-debrief-580-to-690-q48-v37-5month-retake-114597.html

haven't received officials AWA, but will update when I get it in a few days
Re: Please Rate my AOA!   [#permalink] 03 Jun 2011, 20:24
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Please Rate my AOA and suggest improvement - Exam in 15 days!! 0 05 Mar 2016, 10:13
Please Rate my AOA and suggest improvement 0 05 Mar 2016, 06:50
2 Please rate my AOA 5 16 Mar 2017, 05:37
Rate my AOA please 1 14 Jun 2011, 11:35
rate my essay AOA 0 13 May 2011, 08:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Please Rate my AOA!

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.