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.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
13 Jul 2018, 06:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion.
You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument stated above is seriously flawed as it fails to provide concrete evidence for its reasoning. It concludes that Olympic Foods will be able to minimize costs and thus maximize profits due to the company’s “long experience”.
Firstly, the argument opens up by stating that companies become more efficient because they learn to do things better. The example provided to support this claim is the fact that the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The example fails to provide a valid reasons for the price declining. This could be due to significant research and development investments that led to the price decline or it could be due to print materials decreasing in price over the 14 year time frame.
Secondly, perhaps the biggest flaw, is equating what has occurred in the color film industry to the food processing industry. Equating the results of an unrelated industry to the food processing industry is very questionable. For example, the price of food processing machinery could have increased in the stated time frame of 1970 to 1984. Or perhaps, the food processing industry might have experienced financial difficulty which could have in turn forced companies to shut down or consolidate. If justifiable evidence were provided to justify the correlation between the two different industries, then the claim would have some merit.
Thirdly, equating Olympic Foods’ ability to minimize costs and thus maximize profits thanks to the company’s long experience raises a lot of doubt. Profit is calculated by taking revenues and subtracting associated costs. Using that definition, if Olympic Foods has to decrease sale prices due to market pressures more rapidly than it is reducing costs, profits would not increase. Also, relating a company’s ability to increase profits thanks to “time” or “long experience” without providing details as to what happens during that time inhibits the claim from standing on its own. If the reader is given satisfying detail on what the company has done to decrease costs over time, then the claim has some value. For example, the company could have improved its supply chain by buying more efficient machinery or it could have built larger factories to have increased economies of scale.
All in all, the argument does not provide valid reasons to arrive at the conclusion that time and experience aid in increasing efficiency. If the claims accompanying the argument were fortified with detailed reason, the argument would thus have merit.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion.
You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument stated above is seriously flawed as it fails to provide concrete evidence for its reasoning. It concludes that Olympic Foods will be able to minimize costs and thus maximize profits due to the company’s “long experience”.
Firstly, the argument opens up by stating that companies become more efficient because they learn to do things better. The example provided to support this claim is the fact that the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The example fails to provide a valid reasons for the price declining. This could be due to significant research and development investments that led to the price decline or it could be due to print materials decreasing in price over the 14 year time frame.
Secondly, perhaps the biggest flaw, is equating what has occurred in the color film industry to the food processing industry. Equating the results of an unrelated industry to the food processing industry is very questionable. For example, the price of food processing machinery could have increased in the stated time frame of 1970 to 1984. Or perhaps, the food processing industry might have experienced financial difficulty which could have in turn forced companies to shut down or consolidate. If justifiable evidence were provided to justify the correlation between the two different industries, then the claim would have some merit.
Thirdly, equating Olympic Foods’ ability to minimize costs and thus maximize profits thanks to the company’s long experience raises a lot of doubt. Profit is calculated by taking revenues and subtracting associated costs. Using that definition, if Olympic Foods has to decrease sale prices due to market pressures more rapidly than it is reducing costs, profits would not increase. Also, relating a company’s ability to increase profits thanks to “time” or “long experience” without providing details as to what happens during that time inhibits the claim from standing on its own. If the reader is given satisfying detail on what the company has done to decrease costs over time, then the claim has some value. For example, the company could have improved its supply chain by buying more efficient machinery or it could have built larger factories to have increased economies of scale.
All in all, the argument does not provide valid reasons to arrive at the conclusion that time and experience aid in increasing efficiency. If the claims accompanying the argument were fortified with detailed reason, the argument would thus have merit.
13 Jul 2018, 07:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
4
- boring essay structure "first", "second", "third", "all in all", etc
- too short
- no interesting or unique points
- don't start sentences with "also"
- change "is very questionable" to "questionable at best". the former is too colloquial
- "seriously flawed" sounds like an overstatement, and your arguments are not incontrovertible- i think you undermine yourself by overselling with that description
- boring essay structure "first", "second", "third", "all in all", etc
- too short
- no interesting or unique points
- don't start sentences with "also"
- change "is very questionable" to "questionable at best". the former is too colloquial
- "seriously flawed" sounds like an overstatement, and your arguments are not incontrovertible- i think you undermine yourself by overselling with that description
Moderator:
