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.
24 Aug 2023, 21:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, fewer people attended movies produced by Silver Screen during the past year than in any other year. And yet the percentage of generally favorable comments by movie reviewers about specific Silver Screen movies actually increased during this period. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers; the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Silver Screen should therefore spend more of its budget next year on reaching the public through advertising and less on producing new movies."
Response
The argument presented by the marketing department, which suggests allocating more budget to the advertisement and a lesser budget to production seems to have some serious flaws considering the points presented.
One of the major flaws that are evident is the assumption made by the marketing department that the favorable comment of some reviewers can be a representation of the whole audience of the movie. We know that the test of a movie is quite subjective and all have different kinds of tests in the genre. So, taking the perspective of a few individuals who can be influenced by many aspects cannot represent that all people will like the movie. A better way to conclude whether people will like it or not is by taking an opinion about the quality of content in the movie would more accurately describe the general public perspective.
In addition to that the marketing company has pointed out that the perspective of the reviewer is not reaching enough people. That seems to be people who are aware of the movie’s presence in the market, but they are not interested in watching the movie. That cannot indicate that people would definitely come to watch the movie by getting influenced by the reviewers. The marketing team should present some past occurrences when the people actually got influenced and came to watch the movie after the reviewer’s perspective reached them.
Finally, the major flaw of the argument is that reducing the budget of production won’t impact the quality of the content in the movie. And by increasing the budget for marketing and advertisement we can definitely reach more prospects customers. Generally, movie production has some fixed cost which has a direct relation with the quality of content. So, reducing the budget of the movie seems to be based on the flawed assumption that the team can definitely manage without any reduction in quality. In the market, a good quality movie with good content always creates a buzz about it and definitely, it will help to reach out to people on its own. So, the idea to reduce the production budget and allocate them to market the movie should not be an ideal choice.
Response
The argument presented by the marketing department, which suggests allocating more budget to the advertisement and a lesser budget to production seems to have some serious flaws considering the points presented.
One of the major flaws that are evident is the assumption made by the marketing department that the favorable comment of some reviewers can be a representation of the whole audience of the movie. We know that the test of a movie is quite subjective and all have different kinds of tests in the genre. So, taking the perspective of a few individuals who can be influenced by many aspects cannot represent that all people will like the movie. A better way to conclude whether people will like it or not is by taking an opinion about the quality of content in the movie would more accurately describe the general public perspective.
In addition to that the marketing company has pointed out that the perspective of the reviewer is not reaching enough people. That seems to be people who are aware of the movie’s presence in the market, but they are not interested in watching the movie. That cannot indicate that people would definitely come to watch the movie by getting influenced by the reviewers. The marketing team should present some past occurrences when the people actually got influenced and came to watch the movie after the reviewer’s perspective reached them.
Finally, the major flaw of the argument is that reducing the budget of production won’t impact the quality of the content in the movie. And by increasing the budget for marketing and advertisement we can definitely reach more prospects customers. Generally, movie production has some fixed cost which has a direct relation with the quality of content. So, reducing the budget of the movie seems to be based on the flawed assumption that the team can definitely manage without any reduction in quality. In the market, a good quality movie with good content always creates a buzz about it and definitely, it will help to reach out to people on its own. So, the idea to reduce the production budget and allocate them to market the movie should not be an ideal choice.
25 Aug 2023, 23:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity: 4.5/6
The essay generally maintains coherence and connectivity throughout its analysis. The points are logically connected, and the essay follows a clear structure in discussing the flaws in the argument. However, there are a few instances where the flow could be smoother, and transitions between ideas could be improved.
Word Structure: 5/6
The essay employs a variety of sentence structures, and the vocabulary used is appropriate. Some sentences could be more concise without sacrificing clarity, enhancing the overall readability of the essay.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5/6
The essay is divided into coherent paragraphs that address different aspects of the argument. Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence, followed by relevant explanations and examples. However, in a few instances, the paragraphs could be more tightly focused on a single point.
Language and Grammar: 5.5/6
The language and grammar used in the essay are generally strong. There are a few minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings, but they do not significantly impede understanding.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5/6
The vocabulary used is appropriate and demonstrates a good range of vocabulary. However, there are a few instances where word choices could be refined to convey ideas more precisely.
Overall, the essay provides a well-structured analysis of the argument's flaws, focusing on questionable assumptions and offering alternative perspectives. The writing is mostly clear and coherent, with a few areas for improvement in terms of sentence structure and word choice. The analysis could be further strengthened with specific examples and evidence to support the points made.
Coherence and Connectivity: 4.5/6
The essay generally maintains coherence and connectivity throughout its analysis. The points are logically connected, and the essay follows a clear structure in discussing the flaws in the argument. However, there are a few instances where the flow could be smoother, and transitions between ideas could be improved.
Word Structure: 5/6
The essay employs a variety of sentence structures, and the vocabulary used is appropriate. Some sentences could be more concise without sacrificing clarity, enhancing the overall readability of the essay.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5/6
The essay is divided into coherent paragraphs that address different aspects of the argument. Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence, followed by relevant explanations and examples. However, in a few instances, the paragraphs could be more tightly focused on a single point.
Language and Grammar: 5.5/6
The language and grammar used in the essay are generally strong. There are a few minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings, but they do not significantly impede understanding.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5/6
The vocabulary used is appropriate and demonstrates a good range of vocabulary. However, there are a few instances where word choices could be refined to convey ideas more precisely.
Overall, the essay provides a well-structured analysis of the argument's flaws, focusing on questionable assumptions and offering alternative perspectives. The writing is mostly clear and coherent, with a few areas for improvement in terms of sentence structure and word choice. The analysis could be further strengthened with specific examples and evidence to support the points made.
kanhu1998
Moderator:
