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 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
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.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
23 Sep 2023, 05:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in a corporate memorandum of a beverage manufacturer:
“Our promotional price reductions on energy drinks have been highly successful, as we have seen a dramatic increase in unit sales. Further, surveys of our consumers indicate that this promotion was favorably received by the majority of our customers. Therefore, to improve our company’s profitability and enhance its perception in the eyes of consumers, similar price reductions should be offered on all drinks produced by our firm.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
My Answer:
The argument, without sufficient evidence, states that reducing the cost for all drinks produced by the company will increase the overall profitability of the firm and also enhance its perception in the eyes of the consumers, as a similar strategy has worked before with their energy drinks.
Firstly, the argument assumes that the market of energy drinks is similar to that of other drinks produced by them. Reducing the price of energy drinks might have worked in the company's favor as a lot of consumers, who wanted to buy their energy drinks, were previously unable to afford them. The promotional prices may have increased the affordability of the product while having a significant number of interested consumers, hence boosting sales.
Further, the argument assumes that cutting down on prices is the only guaranteed way to increase profitability and public perception of the company, without considering other factors like the taste and accessibility of their products. For example, the other drinks might be cheaper than their energy drinks, but do not have as many sales due to its taste. In such a case, improving the taste of other drinks might increase their sales, in turn boosting profits and public image of the brand. The argument might be strengthened by providing further details on more factors such as taste.
Finally, the argument does not provide any details on the accessibility of the company's products (drinks). To illustrate this, let's assume that their drinks are already affordable by the consumers and profitable for the firm. But what if these drinks are not as widely available as the energy drink? Or what if the other drinks aren't sold in regions where they might reach the intended consumers? Moreover, along with details about their accessibility, the argument should provide more information about the target audience of these drinks. The energy drinks might be accessible near places like gymnasiums, and athletic clubs, where such drinks are generally popular among their members, and hence their increased sales. Thus, providing appropriate details about the accessibility and the intended target audience of these drinks may improve the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to several reasons and can be made stronger by providing the above-mentioned key details.
“Our promotional price reductions on energy drinks have been highly successful, as we have seen a dramatic increase in unit sales. Further, surveys of our consumers indicate that this promotion was favorably received by the majority of our customers. Therefore, to improve our company’s profitability and enhance its perception in the eyes of consumers, similar price reductions should be offered on all drinks produced by our firm.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
My Answer:
The argument, without sufficient evidence, states that reducing the cost for all drinks produced by the company will increase the overall profitability of the firm and also enhance its perception in the eyes of the consumers, as a similar strategy has worked before with their energy drinks.
Firstly, the argument assumes that the market of energy drinks is similar to that of other drinks produced by them. Reducing the price of energy drinks might have worked in the company's favor as a lot of consumers, who wanted to buy their energy drinks, were previously unable to afford them. The promotional prices may have increased the affordability of the product while having a significant number of interested consumers, hence boosting sales.
Further, the argument assumes that cutting down on prices is the only guaranteed way to increase profitability and public perception of the company, without considering other factors like the taste and accessibility of their products. For example, the other drinks might be cheaper than their energy drinks, but do not have as many sales due to its taste. In such a case, improving the taste of other drinks might increase their sales, in turn boosting profits and public image of the brand. The argument might be strengthened by providing further details on more factors such as taste.
Finally, the argument does not provide any details on the accessibility of the company's products (drinks). To illustrate this, let's assume that their drinks are already affordable by the consumers and profitable for the firm. But what if these drinks are not as widely available as the energy drink? Or what if the other drinks aren't sold in regions where they might reach the intended consumers? Moreover, along with details about their accessibility, the argument should provide more information about the target audience of these drinks. The energy drinks might be accessible near places like gymnasiums, and athletic clubs, where such drinks are generally popular among their members, and hence their increased sales. Thus, providing appropriate details about the accessibility and the intended target audience of these drinks may improve the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to several reasons and can be made stronger by providing the above-mentioned key details.
24 Sep 2023, 12:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity (5/6):
The essay demonstrates good coherence and connectivity throughout. It effectively transitions between points and paragraphs, making it easy to follow the argument's flow. However, there is room for slight improvement in connecting ideas even more seamlessly.
Word Structure (5.5/6):
The word structure is strong, with clear and concise language used throughout the essay. Sentence structures are varied, and the vocabulary is appropriate for the task. However, there are a few minor language improvements that could be made.
Paragraph Structure and Formation (5.5/6):
The essay is well-structured into paragraphs, each dealing with a specific point or aspect of the argument. The introduction and conclusion are clear and appropriately placed. However, there could be a bit more depth in the concluding paragraph to summarize the main points more robustly.
Language and Grammar (5.5/6):
Language and grammar are generally strong, with only a few minor issues. There are some minor phrasing and tense inconsistencies that could be improved. For example, "Reduction of the price of energy drinks might have worked..." could be revised to "Reducing the price of energy drinks may have worked...".
Vocabulary and Word Expression (5.5/6):
The essay uses a varied and appropriate vocabulary. However, there is an occasional repetition of phrases like "increased sales" and "boosting profits," which could be diversified for better readability.
Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong analysis of the argument, effectively pointing out its flaws and suggesting improvements. With some minor language and structural enhancements, it could be even more effective.
Coherence and Connectivity (5/6):
The essay demonstrates good coherence and connectivity throughout. It effectively transitions between points and paragraphs, making it easy to follow the argument's flow. However, there is room for slight improvement in connecting ideas even more seamlessly.
Word Structure (5.5/6):
The word structure is strong, with clear and concise language used throughout the essay. Sentence structures are varied, and the vocabulary is appropriate for the task. However, there are a few minor language improvements that could be made.
Paragraph Structure and Formation (5.5/6):
The essay is well-structured into paragraphs, each dealing with a specific point or aspect of the argument. The introduction and conclusion are clear and appropriately placed. However, there could be a bit more depth in the concluding paragraph to summarize the main points more robustly.
Language and Grammar (5.5/6):
Language and grammar are generally strong, with only a few minor issues. There are some minor phrasing and tense inconsistencies that could be improved. For example, "Reduction of the price of energy drinks might have worked..." could be revised to "Reducing the price of energy drinks may have worked...".
Vocabulary and Word Expression (5.5/6):
The essay uses a varied and appropriate vocabulary. However, there is an occasional repetition of phrases like "increased sales" and "boosting profits," which could be diversified for better readability.
Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong analysis of the argument, effectively pointing out its flaws and suggesting improvements. With some minor language and structural enhancements, it could be even more effective.
aapatre
