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 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.
22 Jan 2024, 22:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question - “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.”
Response - The argument claims that long experience will enable organisations to be more efficient and enable lower costs and maximise profits. The conclusion to the argument is based on the premise 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 and the same principle applies to the processing of food as well. The conclusion of the argument relies on an assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the longevity of Olympia foods in the industry has made Olympia foods an efficient organisation and its long experience will enable measures to cut costs and maximise profits. The argument is based on a specific example in the cooler film processing technology which cannot be equated with the food processing industry. It fails to mention other factors which could have caused a decrease in the fall of the print from 50 cents to 20 cents. For example, the decrease in the number of days of service could be attributable to higher number of machines available for color film processing and not efficiency which lower costs. The author fails to mention the total number of machines which were used in 1970 and 1984.
Second, the argument could have been much clearer if the following factors had been mentioned - the advancement of technology reducing the service time and the total number of customers and number of employees which the color film processing company employs in 1970 as against the number in 1984. In fact, it is not at all clear if the decrease in the number of days of service is caused by higher competition in 1984 requiring companies to reduce processing time to stay relevant thereby companies investing in machines with better technology, higher number of staff and reduced prices to attract customers.
Finally, the argument fails to mention one of the key factors the basis of which it could be evaluated that the costs of Olympia foods would reduce due to its entering 25 years of service and the assumption that it has relevant cause to believe that experience can enable cost reduction and higher profits based on an example in the color film processing industry. There are multiple factors such as competition, customer preference, scale of operations to name a few which could
be different.
Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Posted from my mobile device
Response - The argument claims that long experience will enable organisations to be more efficient and enable lower costs and maximise profits. The conclusion to the argument is based on the premise 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 and the same principle applies to the processing of food as well. The conclusion of the argument relies on an assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the longevity of Olympia foods in the industry has made Olympia foods an efficient organisation and its long experience will enable measures to cut costs and maximise profits. The argument is based on a specific example in the cooler film processing technology which cannot be equated with the food processing industry. It fails to mention other factors which could have caused a decrease in the fall of the print from 50 cents to 20 cents. For example, the decrease in the number of days of service could be attributable to higher number of machines available for color film processing and not efficiency which lower costs. The author fails to mention the total number of machines which were used in 1970 and 1984.
Second, the argument could have been much clearer if the following factors had been mentioned - the advancement of technology reducing the service time and the total number of customers and number of employees which the color film processing company employs in 1970 as against the number in 1984. In fact, it is not at all clear if the decrease in the number of days of service is caused by higher competition in 1984 requiring companies to reduce processing time to stay relevant thereby companies investing in machines with better technology, higher number of staff and reduced prices to attract customers.
Finally, the argument fails to mention one of the key factors the basis of which it could be evaluated that the costs of Olympia foods would reduce due to its entering 25 years of service and the assumption that it has relevant cause to believe that experience can enable cost reduction and higher profits based on an example in the color film processing industry. There are multiple factors such as competition, customer preference, scale of operations to name a few which could
be different.
Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Posted from my mobile device
23 Jan 2024, 01:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 - 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5/6
The essay demonstrates a high level of coherence and connectivity. Each paragraph follows a clear structure, with a well-defined introduction, body, and conclusion. The ideas are logically organized, and the transitions between sentences and paragraphs are smooth. The essay effectively connects ideas and maintains a clear line of reasoning throughout.
Word Structure: 5/6
The word structure is generally strong, with a variety of sentence structures used to convey the author's ideas. The essay effectively utilizes vocabulary to articulate points. There are some instances where sentence structures could be more varied for enhanced fluency and engagement, but overall, the word structure contributes to the essay's effectiveness.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5.5/6
The essay exhibits a sound paragraph structure and formation. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument, with a topic sentence introducing the main idea. The paragraphs are well-developed, providing thorough analysis and supporting details. However, there could be slight improvement in transitioning between paragraphs for even greater cohesion.
Language and Grammar: 5.5/6
The language and grammar usage are strong overall. The essay is written in a formal tone, and grammar is mostly correct. There are a few instances where sentence construction could be refined for clarity, and minor grammatical errors are present. However, these do not significantly impede comprehension, and the overall language use is effective.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5.5/6
The vocabulary and word expression are commendable. The essay employs a diverse range of vocabulary, contributing to the clarity and precision of the argument. There are a few places where more precise or nuanced word choices could be beneficial, but the overall vocabulary usage enhances the essay's quality.
The essay is well-structured, effectively analyzing the argument's flaws and presenting a coherent response. It demonstrates a strong command of language and exhibits proficiency in addressing the key elements of coherence, word structure, paragraph formation, language, and vocabulary.
Coherence and Connectivity: 5.5/6
The essay demonstrates a high level of coherence and connectivity. Each paragraph follows a clear structure, with a well-defined introduction, body, and conclusion. The ideas are logically organized, and the transitions between sentences and paragraphs are smooth. The essay effectively connects ideas and maintains a clear line of reasoning throughout.
Word Structure: 5/6
The word structure is generally strong, with a variety of sentence structures used to convey the author's ideas. The essay effectively utilizes vocabulary to articulate points. There are some instances where sentence structures could be more varied for enhanced fluency and engagement, but overall, the word structure contributes to the essay's effectiveness.
Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5.5/6
The essay exhibits a sound paragraph structure and formation. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument, with a topic sentence introducing the main idea. The paragraphs are well-developed, providing thorough analysis and supporting details. However, there could be slight improvement in transitioning between paragraphs for even greater cohesion.
Language and Grammar: 5.5/6
The language and grammar usage are strong overall. The essay is written in a formal tone, and grammar is mostly correct. There are a few instances where sentence construction could be refined for clarity, and minor grammatical errors are present. However, these do not significantly impede comprehension, and the overall language use is effective.
Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5.5/6
The vocabulary and word expression are commendable. The essay employs a diverse range of vocabulary, contributing to the clarity and precision of the argument. There are a few places where more precise or nuanced word choices could be beneficial, but the overall vocabulary usage enhances the essay's quality.
The essay is well-structured, effectively analyzing the argument's flaws and presenting a coherent response. It demonstrates a strong command of language and exhibits proficiency in addressing the key elements of coherence, word structure, paragraph formation, language, and vocabulary.
AnirudhGoda
Moderator:
