The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to max
[#permalink]
05 Jul 2021, 17:06
Hello All!
I have been working on improving my analytical writing skills in preparation for the GMAT. As such I have attempted writing a few essays in response to certain prompts. I would very much appreciate any assistance in terms of assessing these essays with any additional feedback on how I would be able to improve.
Thanks in advance!
Prompt:
“The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize
their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in
it— even though that amount is far more than any other person involved with the
movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to
work in several films that were very financially successful."
Essay:
In this argument the author suggests that the movie 3003 will yield the highest profits if the producers are willing to pay Robin Good a far higher wage than other
actors involved with the film. The author addresses the reasoning behind this claim drawing parallels to other movies which performed well, where Robin was paid similar amounts.
This argument is unconvincing due to two main flaws.
The first flaw to be addressed would be that the author suggests that Robin Good's performance would be dictated by the wage spent on the actor with no additional data to back this claim.
Although it may be true that Robin's previous films have performed well there is no established correlation between the actors wage and the performance of the film.
Moreover there are a plethora of additional factors that affect the financial performance of a film other than the appearance of a single actor, the author fails to address any of these
factors, such as the plot, cinematography and the other actors, to name a few. Lacking a more detailed analysis of the role these factors played in the other films renders Robin's appearance
in these films, and the financial success of these films, redundant at best.
To conclude the argument is weak in itself lacking fundamental data and analysis to support these broad claims. To provide a stronger justification that the producers of 3003 will financially
benefit from Robin's inclusion the author would need to provide evidence that the financial success of the movie was solely attributed to Robin Good's appearance.
Prompt:
“Our total sales have increased this year by 20 percent since we added a pharmacy
section to our grocery store. Clearly, the customer’s main concern is the
convenience afforded by one-stop shopping. The surest way to increase our profits
over the next couple of years, therefore, is to add a clothing department along with
an automotive supplies and repair shop. We should also plan to continue adding
new departments and services, such as a restaurant and a garden shop, in
subsequent years. Being the only store in the area that offers such a range of
services will give us a competitive advantage over other local stores.”
Essay:
The authors of this article claims that the primary reason attributing to the stores 20% increase in sales is solely due to the customers inclination towards one-stop shopping.
The author bases this assumption off the single instance of the increase in sales following the addition of the pharmacy. The author continues, stating that the inclusion of
additional departments would lead to an increase in overall profits as well. The validity of this statement is unconvincing for a multitude of reasons.
Firstly the leap in assumption made by the author that the sales increase due to the introduction of a pharmacy, represents the customers desire for a one stop shopping experience is
flawed in it self. The author presents no evidence suggesting that customers have expressed this as a concern and seems to leap to this conclusion with no fundamental backing.
The additional profit could potentially be solely from the pharmacies profits which would have no bearing on the customers desire for a one-stop shop. Moreover, the author is basing
the assumption off a single sample size. There are no defining factors which would suggest expanding the offered departments would directly correlate to a raise in overall profits.
An additional unsubstantiated remark my the author would be that continuing expanding the departments would yield further profits. This argument would seem to be based of the single
instance of the pharmacy addition and thus may not hold true for other general additions. Observing a larger sample size, pharmacies may be the sole department addition
which lead to a store's increase in profitability while other additions fail to do so. Given the lack of this information it would be tough to argue the authors claim.
Furthermore the author presents a blanket statement that adding further additions would result in the surest way to improve the store profits. The excerpt fails to mention any additional
strategies explored by the author in respect to increasing profits thus leaving the claim baseless.
To conclude the authors argument is unconvincing as it lacks addressing many fundamental questions but instead seem to take logical leaps with little to no justification. The author would
need to address the questions outlined above along with identify key reasonings for the claims to demonstrate a stronger argument.