|
|
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.
xiaoyuzhan
Joined: 28 Aug 2016
Last visit: 11 Sep 2019
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
Location: United States
Schools: Marshall '20 (A$)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.46
WE:Corporate Finance (Healthcare/Pharmaceuticals)
28 Aug 2016, 19:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi friends:
My test is next Saturday so I would love to get some feedback on my AWA.
Anything is appreciated, thank you!
Topic: The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper. "Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company's projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations." Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.
The editorial above claims that since commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below projection, the shuttle company must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at subway stations. However, this argument contains logical fallacies and overlooks other factors that could have contributed to this outcome. Therefore, the conclusion can’t be relied upon to make policy changes.
Firstly, the editorial readily assumes that shuttle bus fare price and the parking price are the only two factors that affect a commuter’s decision on whether they take the shuttle bus or not. But this is clearly a leap of faith that is unsupported by any evidence. For example, the main reason that commuters decide not to take the shuttle bus could simply be because they are commuting from suburban areas outside of the city and shuttle buses do not go that far out. If the shuttle buses have no routes that goes to these suburban areas, commuters have no choice but to drive to subway stations. To illustrate, many workers who commute to Los Angeles live at least 30 miles outside of the downtown area where the majority of companies and businesses are located. For these workers, they have no choice but drive to the central union station then take the subway to get to work. Reducing fare prices or increasing parking pries will have zero effect on this population.
Secondly, the editorial overlooks other factors that could contribute to a commuter’s decision in deciding whether to use the shuttle bus. A big factor that could determine commuter behavior is the frequency of the shuttles. If the shuttle buses only run every 30 minutes, many people would find this inconvenient and as such choose to drive to the subway station instead. In addition, the shuttle bus may have multiple stops which increases the total passage time it takes to get to the subway station, making driving to the subway station a more time efficient choice. Without a more in depth analysis of what matters the most to commuters, it is simply impossible to support the claim the editorial makes.
In conclusion, the editorial makes a general conclusion that is not able to be substantiated based on the facts given. In order to strengthen the argument, the transit company should conduct a consumer survey to gain insight on why commuters are not using the shuttle bus. Only with this in depth analysis can an appropriate strategy be developed. With the current information presented in the argument, the conclusion is dubious and will most likely fail to achieve its intended effect.
My test is next Saturday so I would love to get some feedback on my AWA.
Anything is appreciated, thank you!
Topic: The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper. "Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company's projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations." Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.
The editorial above claims that since commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below projection, the shuttle company must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at subway stations. However, this argument contains logical fallacies and overlooks other factors that could have contributed to this outcome. Therefore, the conclusion can’t be relied upon to make policy changes.
Firstly, the editorial readily assumes that shuttle bus fare price and the parking price are the only two factors that affect a commuter’s decision on whether they take the shuttle bus or not. But this is clearly a leap of faith that is unsupported by any evidence. For example, the main reason that commuters decide not to take the shuttle bus could simply be because they are commuting from suburban areas outside of the city and shuttle buses do not go that far out. If the shuttle buses have no routes that goes to these suburban areas, commuters have no choice but to drive to subway stations. To illustrate, many workers who commute to Los Angeles live at least 30 miles outside of the downtown area where the majority of companies and businesses are located. For these workers, they have no choice but drive to the central union station then take the subway to get to work. Reducing fare prices or increasing parking pries will have zero effect on this population.
Secondly, the editorial overlooks other factors that could contribute to a commuter’s decision in deciding whether to use the shuttle bus. A big factor that could determine commuter behavior is the frequency of the shuttles. If the shuttle buses only run every 30 minutes, many people would find this inconvenient and as such choose to drive to the subway station instead. In addition, the shuttle bus may have multiple stops which increases the total passage time it takes to get to the subway station, making driving to the subway station a more time efficient choice. Without a more in depth analysis of what matters the most to commuters, it is simply impossible to support the claim the editorial makes.
In conclusion, the editorial makes a general conclusion that is not able to be substantiated based on the facts given. In order to strengthen the argument, the transit company should conduct a consumer survey to gain insight on why commuters are not using the shuttle bus. Only with this in depth analysis can an appropriate strategy be developed. With the current information presented in the argument, the conclusion is dubious and will most likely fail to achieve its intended effect.
Moderators:
188 posts
