Please critique on my AWA

Question

The following appeared in a proposal from the development office at Platonic University:
"Because Platonic University has had difficulty in meeting its expenses over the past three years, we need to find new ways to increase revenues. We should consider following the example of Greene University, which recently renamed itself after a donor who gave it $100 million. If Platonic University were to advertise to its alumni and other wealthy people that it will rename either individual buildings or the entire university itself after the donors who give the most
money, the amount of donations would undoubtedly increase."

The proposal from the development office of Platonic University narrates a proposal to increase revenues significantly to meet expenses and hence cites a method employed by Greene University to raise $100 million. The development office plans to use the same technique to raise revenue. This argument is flawed and misses a lot of factors necessary to build a logical comparison between the two universities.

First, the development office of Platonic University is keen to employ a method already successful in Greene University, but the argument provides us with no insights to prove that both Greene University and Platonic Universities are the same. This leaves us to an understanding that X is not Y. For example- If we consider Platonic University to be a new university with only 2 years of establishment and Greene University as a well-established university with rich alumni, then we can disapprove of the conclusion as the plan will not be a success. As this argument leaves many questions unanswered, we are not sure whether a plan successful for one university can be successful for others.

Second, the argument fails to build a correlation between increasing revenues and getting funded, as both factors play a completely different role. Funding is a one-time investment and it is neither responsible for increasing long term revenue nor decrease the expenses of the university. For example - It is possible that Platonic University might be suffering from mismanagement and so is not able to meet the expenses and in that case, even the funding won't help as the university will still have difficulty in managing the expenses and the amount will fade away in the short period of time.

Finally, the argument leaves many questions unanswered such as - Will the Platonic University recover itself from the burden of excessive expenses and become profitable by a one-time investment? What unstated assumptions have been made by the development office to conclude that Platonic University can be compared to Greene University? Does a method which applies to one university can apply to others?

This argument is therefore logically flawed and relies on false assumptions and considers that X and Y are always the same and are interchangeable factors. This argument also leaves many questions unanswered and can be strengthened by knowing whether the method applied by Greene University is universal as a whole and can provide Platonic University with the appropriate amount of funds. We also require information about the reasons for the university not meeting expenses and can it be improved in the long run.

daagh · Answer

Videep
Nice job; congratulations. 
PFA a review of your awa. 
Wishes and regards

daagh · Answer

Bunuel
I think this posting is in the wrong forum. Can you please transfer it to the correct forum?

gmatapprentice · Answer

daagh  Can you please provide a critique on this essay?

Traffic in the central city is the number one complaint of our residents, so I urge you to consider this solution. We should invest in doubling our bus service and adding a light rail system, giving more options to those who don't want to drive through the city. Furthermore, we should make public transportation more accessible by reducing the fees to ride. With less traffic people will be more productive, and with higher productivity comes higher revenue and more taxes, so the system will likely pay for itself.

While the mayor makes some relevant points in his proposal with regards to addressing the core issue of traffic in the city. His suggestion to alleviate the traffic problem by doubling bus service and adding a light rail system may at first sight seem like a good solution, there are a number of issues with the proposed solution. In addition, the plan certainly opens itself to criticism once the mayor suggests to reduce the fees on public transport while funding the investments in new bus services, light rail system and subsidies with increased revenues resulting from productivity.

In terms of passengers per vehicle, the bus services and light rail system definitely make a sound case for traffic reduction because of the assumed reduction in cars that will follow. However, isn't this a case of replacing cars with buses? How would more buses and less cars have an impact on the traffic situation? There needs to be more analysis around the impact on average speed on the streets with the replacement of cars with buses for the people opting for public transport. When compared to buses, the light rail systems are definitely a better option though come at a much larger cost.

This brings us to the point of financing such proposed investments and subsidies. The mayor's proposal makes a simplistic assumption that with less traffic people would be more productive without providing any evidence. Will average travel time for those commuting to the city be less on public transport than in cars? Even if that were to be the case, the link between productivity, revenue and higher taxes is unclear. The number of disposable hours would increase but this may not necessarily translate into more work from the employee, which in turn doesn't translate into higher revenue in all cases.

The mayor's attempt to propose a viable solution for the city's traffic problems seems plausible at first sight. A deeper analysis into the cause and effect relationship reveals a number of inconsistencies in the transport solution as well as the funding for such solution. The mayor is relying on untangible to pay for the tangible why there needs to be a better mechanism to raise funding - for instance tolls at motorways, public transport fees.

daagh · Answer

I am away from my home for a week. I will do it on return

Posted from my mobile device

gmatapprentice · Answer

daagh  no worries - I have already sat the exam. Thanks anyway.

	Manhattan Prep: $99 Bonus Score Higher on Your GMAT Exam. Guaranteed.
	Target Test Prep - Save up to $599 $400 Discount + $99 Bonus GMAT Club Tests
	e-GMAT: 60% Off on GMAT Focus Get to 735+ from any starting point
	Magoosh increases your score, guaranteed - 15% off ALL Magoosh GMAT plans with code GMATCLUB15 + Free GMAT Club Tests.
	Experts' Global - ~~$1720~~ $960 End-to-End GMAT Prep + App Support: 150+ Videos, 2000+ Questions, 15 FLTs +
	GMATWhiz - $299 ~~$499~~ Experience the course through a free trial.
	GMAT Club Tests - Free Included with every course purchase of $149+ View all deals

Please critique on my AWA

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards