Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker’s consumption of coffee

Could you please rate my essay?

--------------------------------------------------------------

The argument states that the firm should transfer it’s investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee. This is inferred because of the observations that cola drinker’s decrease consumption with age and coffee drinker’s increase consumption with age. The author says that the number of older adults will significantly increase in the following 20 years, and so, concludes that the demand of cola will decrease and the demand of coffee increase. Stated this way, the author manipulates the facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. Furthermore, fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated. Finally, the conclusion relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the claim is rather weak and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that the trend of Cola and Coffee consumption will remain the same in the future. This statement is not quite solid because it does not consider new market innovators that might arrive and change old consumption belief. For instance, there are drinks that are currently threatening the use of coffee as a energy booster like Red Bull and Yerba Matte, which are in fact not a threat to Colas. Clearly in this case the argument falls apart and the author could have been much more precise if he explicitly stated the reasons why he expects for market trends to continue the same and how will coffee companies address the threat from energy drinks.

Second, the author claims that we should change investments given that Coffee consumption will increase and Cola’s consumption will decrease. This is again a very weak and unproven point as the author does not demonstrate a casual connection between the value or profitability of an investment and the demand for a product. To illustrate consider the case where this line of thought, Cola’s demand going down and Coffee’s going up, is already known by everyone and, thus, the market price already takes into account this information. With this in mind, it might be that Early Bird is already expensive and has no value left on the investment and therefore it is more convenient to stay in Cola Loca. This example clearly shows that the argument has flaws. If the author had provided evidence of the value proposition of the investment, then the claim would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, let’s take into consideration some additional questions. What other products might come up that replace Coffee? Is Early Bird a good innovator in the Industry? Is it a better innovator than Cola Loca? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for all the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. In order to assess the merits of the change in investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird, it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors. In this case, the author could have been much more convincing if had shown insights of key issues such as the arguments to say that the trends will continue and the value proposition of the investment. Without this information, the claim is unsupported and open to debate.

Hi would be great if someone could rate the content of my essay too.

The above paragraph sets a very good example of how the actual numbers and percentage changes affect a statement taken as fact, when looked at in siloes. And there are two very good reasons why the above two figures cannot be used to justify why the advice given by the investment and consulting firm cannot be taken at face value.

First of all, we do not know the ratio of people who are in the age groups 1 to 10 and in the age group 10 through 60. If the total number of people in the first age group is higher than the second, in the next twenty years, they will be the ones more likely to consume cola, than coffee, and by the sheer figure, would be a larger population, and thus, would contribute higher sales in cola department. Moreover, while this trend has remained stable for the past 40 years, we do not know what is the trend for birth rates, as compared against last 40 years. If it's higher than the number of people falling in the higher age ranges where coffee consumption is higher, keeping the investment in running the cola division would still make more sense than shifting it.

Secondly, we do not know the rate of decline of coffee consumption against the rate of increase in coffee consumption. It may be that the difference in both the rates is significantly different and rate of decline is actually very very slow (to be considered minimal) as compared against rate of rise n coffee consumption. Thus, the sale of coffee might not increase as much to compensate for the reduction in coffee supply, leading to loss in profit, and also a decline in cost effectiveness of producing a product which might not even be consumed and giving it extra inventory space which will not get replenished.

If we had the rates for the rise and decline available, plus the predicted population in both age groups in the next twenty years, then that data would have been sufficient to make the above assumption.

Therefore, currently, the advice of the investment and financial consulting firm is dubious as all the data points have not been taken into consideration.

Hi, Can someone please use AWA rater on the below Essay.

"The argument concludes that investments should be transferred from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee. The reason stated for this strategy is that as the population ages over the next 20 years, coffee consumption will increase and cola consumption will decrease and that this trend has remained stable for the past 40 years. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions, which are unsubstantiated. This makes the argument rather weak, unconvincing and riddled with flawed reasoning.

First, the argument does not quantify the demands of Coffee versus Cola. While the demand for Cola may decrease over time and the demand for Coffee increases, the overall demand for Cola can very well still be higher than the overall demand for Coffee. This assumption is flawed and in no way gives a fair comparison of the demand between the two commodities. The argument could could be strengthened if it provides quantified data on the overall demands of the two commodities and prove without a doubt that the demand for Cola is lower than the demand for Coffee over time.

Second, even if we assume that the demand for Cola will be lower than the demand for Coffee, the argument does not guarantee that the profitability of investing in the higher demand commodity i.e. Coffee, will be higher than than the profitability of investing in Cola. The argument readily assumes that if demand is less in a commodity as compared to another commodity, the rewards of investing in the lower demand commodity will automatically be lower as well. This assumption is a stretch and relies on baseless foundations. The argument could be strengthened with data estimating or forecasting the return on investment on the two commodities over time.

In summary, the argument is weak and has several flaws. It could be strengthened if the above mentioned facts and figures are conveyed. It is essential for a good investment strategy to take into consideration all the relevant factors. The argument, unfortunately does not take this into account."

Hello Utkersh

Are you OK with the line spacing and alignment of your pasted essay? If Not, why you didn't fixed it?

That's weird. On my screen, the spacing and aligning seems okay. But in your reply screen, I see that it is way off. Apologies for this, not sure how to fix it since it is fine on my screen.

5/6 well structured

Posted from my mobile device

All right I did it for you.

Hi, please rate my essay. Thanks in advance


In the given argument, the author states that because coffee consumption increases with age and cola consumption reduces as one gets older, the demand for coffee will be more and for cola will be less, in the coming years. Another assumption is that this trend will continue for the next 20 years. Therefore, the author suggests one should invest in Early Bird Coffee company instead of a cola company named Cola Loca. This reasoning is flawed without any supporting evidence.

Firstly, the author does not provide any statistical data to prove the fact that coffee consumption increases and cola consumption decreases with age. There is no information on how this data has been collected. It maybe be possible that a survey was done to find out the facts but the sample size was too small to generalize the entire population.

Secondly, the author assumes that because the trend has remained unchanged for the past 40 years, similar conditions will prevail for the next 20 years. This statement seems unconvincing without supporting facts. It may happen that older people can start drinking cola as equally as they drink coffee. Maybe the cola companies launch a health-based drink for older people, in such a situation, cola consumption and demand will increase. Had the author provided more information on how this trend was formulated and whether it was cited by certified newspapers, the argument would have been more substantive.

Thirdly, the author concludes that one should invest in a coffee company named Early Bird Coffee, rather than Coca-Loca, purely on the basis of the consumption patterns of older age people. However, this is not enough to make an investment decision. There is no information on whether people actually like the taste of coffee produced by Early Bird Coffee. We also do not know the earnings per share of both companies or what their profit % is, how much sales they generate each year, quarterly profit trends, etc.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons. Had the author given more relevant information about other factors or any statistical data, the argument would have been more convincing.

Hi Sajjad1994,

Can you please rate my essay? Thanks


The argument claims that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease over the period of next 20 years given the fact that the number of older adults will significantly increase during the same period. Stated this way, the argument fails to consider several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument claims that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim. The argument fails to recognise that as the population ages, the number of people in each age group remains relatively the same. This is due to the fact that as people grow older, the new generation also grows older and replaces them. It is possible that while the number of older adults increase significantly, there is a significant increase in the people belonging to age group 10 to 40 and subsequently the consumption and demand of cola increases.

Second, the argument assumes that the trends in the future will not change because they have remained stable for the past 40 years. This assumption lacks foundation. Just because a trend has remained stable for sometime in the past does not guarantee that it will remain stable in the future as well. For instance, the GDP growth rate in India remained stable from 2014-2020 but in 2021 the arrival of covid 19 pandemic significantly affected the GDP rate for the year 2021 and was well below the GDP rate of the past 7 years. This proves that trends need not be stable for the upcoming future.

Third, the argument claims that the firm should consider transferring investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee just because of general economic factors. This assumption is not based on a very strong premise. The assumption applies changes that is happening to a group to an individual. There have been numerous instances where the negative changes in the industry conditions have positively affected a particular company of that industry. For instance, in the US when all major automobile companies were facing difficulties due to the changing economy, Tesla proved to be a defiant of the trend and emerged as a major played in the industry. Therefore the assumption that transferring investments to Early Bird Coffee will be beneficial to the company is flawed.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It can be considerably strengthened if the author provided instances to support his conclusion. In order to assess a certain situation, it is extremely important to have full knowledge of all relevant contributing factors.

Hi Sajjad1994, Please review my AWA, thanks.

My essay:

The aforementioned argument claims that an investment and financial consulting firm should consider transferring their invesments from Cola Loca, cold brand, to Early Bird Coffee, a coffee brand because of increasing number of older adults over the next 20 years. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. Among the most pivotal shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address, or even acknowledge, its underlying assumptions and provide sufficient information to substantiate its claims. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.

First, the argument claims that demand for coffee will increase and demand for cola will decrease in next 20 years. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For example, it may be the case that even after reduced demand for cola, still revenues generated from selling cola is higher than that generated from selling coffee. Since the argument does not provide current statistics of coffee and cola consumption and hence, revnues generated from their sale, it can not be ascertained that transferring investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee will be beneficial for the firm. Clearly this leap of faith affects the reasoning of the argument. The argument would have been much clearer if it explicitly provided additional information to be in a better position to comment on investment strategy of the firm.

Second, the argument assumes that, to cater to increased demand for cola, firm should transfer its investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee. However, argument misses several another possible courses of action that could be possible. For instance, the firm may be able to cater to increased demand for coffee without reducing its investments in brand of cola. The argument does not provide any reason to believe that this is the best course of action that firm should opt for. The argument would have been a lot more convincing if it provided further evidence to cement its reasoning as to why transferring invesments from Cola Loca to Early Bird coffee is suitable for the firm.

Further, the argument fails to provide answer to few questions. For example, what will be the general population distribution of young adults in next 20 years? As this may provide significant insights as to how much will the consumption of cola reduce over next 20 years. In addition, How likely is for the trends observed for coffee and cola consumption in the past, to continue in the future? Without answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than a substantive evidence. As a result, the conclusion has no legs to stand on.

In conclusion, the aforementioned argument contains a considerable number of defects, most blatant of which have been discussed above. The argument could have been strengthened considerably, if answers to questions raised above were provided. However, as it stands, one must necessarily conclude that the argument is a hasty generalization filled with overreaching assumptions and deficiencies in information. Without this information, the conclusion is unsubstantiated and remains open to debate.

Sajjad1994 please help in rating the below awa

The argument claims that as the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20years, so the demand of coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. So it concludes by saying that the investments should be transgerred from Cola Loca to Eary Bird Coffee. The reasoning behind the conclusion is clearly flawed as it has not provided with enough evidence to support the claim.

Firstly, the argument states that based on 40 years pattern it is always that an average coffee driker's consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60.However , the average cola drinker's consumption of cola declines with increasing age. This claim is flawed as we don not know at what particular age it starts declining. Also the declining rate cannot be compared if we do not know enough statistics to compare how much increase is there for coffee consumption and how much decrease for cola consumption. Even after those details we need to know the number of people involved as well.

Secondly, the argument assumes that as the consumption of coffee increases with age it means the number of people also increases with age. It is clearly flwed as it fails to consider the possibility of the mortality rate or the fertility rate. Are we aware if there won't be a spike of birth rates? Are we aware if the death rate won't be more as people age? Without considering these factors jumping to conclusion to reduce investment on Cola Loca and increase in Early Bird Coffee is clearly flawed.

Finally, the argument fails to establish the correlation between the number of people using Cola and Coffee and just assumes based on average drinker's consumption. The investment decision should not be made based on just average. The statsitical results like how many people , how much turnover, how much discount, are people addicted to something or is there any availability issue, is there any geographical or demographical factors involved. Because of aforementioned reasons the conclusion is clearly flawed.
We can thus conclude that the argument is clearly flawed and doesn't provide enough evidence to claim the investment strategy. Thus to make the argument flawless more substantive reasoning need to be provided.