|
|
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.
13 Jun 2016, 11:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in the opinion column of a financial magazine:
“On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and
services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will
increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly
during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those
products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer.”
Above argument mentions that within next decade departmental stores will see increase in sales by assuming increase in middle aged consumers who spend 39% of the expenditure in them. Infact there is no data or proofs are shown that this is true and hence even conclusion also doesn’t have any substantial proof that stores should begin replacing their products to attract younger consumers.
Firstly, there is no proper evidence or data to prove that 39% of expenditure spent by middle aged people is on departmental stores whereas 25% by youth. This actually can be made more concrete by mentioning the area researched as in some areas there may be a chance for more youth who are attracted to online shopping and not even 25% will be seen spending on departmental stores and it’s the same case with middle aged groups. In this internet era people tend to shop online where the products are delivered to the door without going physically into the stores. Argument makes more legit if they could have narrowed it down to countries and areas (urban and rural may be) because in some countries lack of internet education or lack of access to internet people have to go to stores and age doesn’t matter in this context. For instance, lets consider remote village in southern india which doesn’t have internet access then all aged people need to go to stores to buy the products then aforementioned 39% and 25% doesn’t holds good.
Secondly, the assumption that middle aged people will be increased within next decade doesn’t show any statistical data. Premise assumption is connecting to conclusion that retail sales also will be increased. This statement again cannot be generalized considering one section of people or one area of people. If writer should have mentioned any place of research or place from where data is taken then it makes more sense to consider his words. For example what if some city in North America had majority of middle aged people and less young people then its obvious that departmental stores cannot see any increase in sales within next decade.
Finally, just by believing some random assumptions without any substantial evidence or any concrete data one cannot come to conclusion that stores should begin replacing younger consumer products with middle aged consumer products. For example , Macy’s cannot replace all of its inventory throughout US by middle aged products without having any concrete data as it will majorly hit their sales if writer’s argument is wrong.
In conclusion, argument can be strengthened by providing more details about geographical information, statistical data, concrete proofs about all the aforementioned points.
“On average, middle-aged consumers devote 39 percent of their retail expenditure to department store products and
services, while for younger consumers the average is only 25 percent. Since the number of middle-aged people will
increase dramatically within the next decade, department stores can expect retail sales to increase significantly
during that period. Furthermore, to take advantage of the trend, these stores should begin to replace some of those
products intended to attract the younger consumer with products intended to attract the middle-aged consumer.”
Above argument mentions that within next decade departmental stores will see increase in sales by assuming increase in middle aged consumers who spend 39% of the expenditure in them. Infact there is no data or proofs are shown that this is true and hence even conclusion also doesn’t have any substantial proof that stores should begin replacing their products to attract younger consumers.
Firstly, there is no proper evidence or data to prove that 39% of expenditure spent by middle aged people is on departmental stores whereas 25% by youth. This actually can be made more concrete by mentioning the area researched as in some areas there may be a chance for more youth who are attracted to online shopping and not even 25% will be seen spending on departmental stores and it’s the same case with middle aged groups. In this internet era people tend to shop online where the products are delivered to the door without going physically into the stores. Argument makes more legit if they could have narrowed it down to countries and areas (urban and rural may be) because in some countries lack of internet education or lack of access to internet people have to go to stores and age doesn’t matter in this context. For instance, lets consider remote village in southern india which doesn’t have internet access then all aged people need to go to stores to buy the products then aforementioned 39% and 25% doesn’t holds good.
Secondly, the assumption that middle aged people will be increased within next decade doesn’t show any statistical data. Premise assumption is connecting to conclusion that retail sales also will be increased. This statement again cannot be generalized considering one section of people or one area of people. If writer should have mentioned any place of research or place from where data is taken then it makes more sense to consider his words. For example what if some city in North America had majority of middle aged people and less young people then its obvious that departmental stores cannot see any increase in sales within next decade.
Finally, just by believing some random assumptions without any substantial evidence or any concrete data one cannot come to conclusion that stores should begin replacing younger consumer products with middle aged consumer products. For example , Macy’s cannot replace all of its inventory throughout US by middle aged products without having any concrete data as it will majorly hit their sales if writer’s argument is wrong.
In conclusion, argument can be strengthened by providing more details about geographical information, statistical data, concrete proofs about all the aforementioned points.
Moderator:
