Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Dec 1511:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.- Dec 14
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
09 Jul 2022, 07:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi all!
Could you guys please help me with some feedback on this essay response?
Any help will be truly appreciated!
Many thanks in advance!
Mario
Question:
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Essay:
The previous argument contains several logical flaws which reduce the conclusion's legitimacy. Primarily, the author relies on unfounded assumptions and ignores potential negative outcomes.
Firstly, the argument is entirely based on a very bold assumption: that limiting the product's warranty will have no impact on sales. As the aim is improving the profit margins, it would be quite natural to think about possible negative scenarios in which sales drop because of the change in warranty policies. In fact, years of warranty tends to be a determining factor ina sale, specially among certain consumer segments. The fact the author did not take this into account brings into question his whole case and hurts the conclusion. Customer insigth from research or focus groups providing more data about the possible consequences would have helped strengthen the argument.
Furthermore, the author is almost completely ignoring the consumer loyalty factor. It is well-known that good customer service helps keep the customers satisfied and improves the chances of them continuing to purchase products from that company. Limiting warranties and decreasing the quality of customer support can gravely hurt the brand name. However, this argument seems to view this factor as not relevant, therefore assuming that no disadvantageous consequences will occur. This further diminishes the argument's validity.
Also, the argument seems to be solely based on the author's own views and opinions, as no actual data is presented to support the case. With no solid information backing the argument, the conclusion is then widely vulnerable to doubts and unanswerable questions, rendering it greatly weak.
Taking all if these points into account, we can conclude that the argument is severely flawed in its logic and basis, thus being unsuccessful in its main objective of convincing the reader. If more solid information and data supporting the author's conclusions would have been provided, the argument would probably have at least made a legitimate case.
Could you guys please help me with some feedback on this essay response?
Any help will be truly appreciated!
Many thanks in advance!
Mario
Question:
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Essay:
The previous argument contains several logical flaws which reduce the conclusion's legitimacy. Primarily, the author relies on unfounded assumptions and ignores potential negative outcomes.
Firstly, the argument is entirely based on a very bold assumption: that limiting the product's warranty will have no impact on sales. As the aim is improving the profit margins, it would be quite natural to think about possible negative scenarios in which sales drop because of the change in warranty policies. In fact, years of warranty tends to be a determining factor ina sale, specially among certain consumer segments. The fact the author did not take this into account brings into question his whole case and hurts the conclusion. Customer insigth from research or focus groups providing more data about the possible consequences would have helped strengthen the argument.
Furthermore, the author is almost completely ignoring the consumer loyalty factor. It is well-known that good customer service helps keep the customers satisfied and improves the chances of them continuing to purchase products from that company. Limiting warranties and decreasing the quality of customer support can gravely hurt the brand name. However, this argument seems to view this factor as not relevant, therefore assuming that no disadvantageous consequences will occur. This further diminishes the argument's validity.
Also, the argument seems to be solely based on the author's own views and opinions, as no actual data is presented to support the case. With no solid information backing the argument, the conclusion is then widely vulnerable to doubts and unanswerable questions, rendering it greatly weak.
Taking all if these points into account, we can conclude that the argument is severely flawed in its logic and basis, thus being unsuccessful in its main objective of convincing the reader. If more solid information and data supporting the author's conclusions would have been provided, the argument would probably have at least made a legitimate case.
10 Jul 2022, 11:40
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 4/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Good Luck
Mario79
Hi all!
Could you guys please help me with some feedback on this essay response?
Any help will be truly appreciated!
Many thanks in advance!
Mario
Question:
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Essay:
The previous argument contains several logical flaws which reduce the conclusion's legitimacy. Primarily, the author relies on unfounded assumptions and ignores potential negative outcomes.
Firstly, the argument is entirely based on a very bold assumption: that limiting the product's warranty will have no impact on sales. As the aim is improving the profit margins, it would be quite natural to think about possible negative scenarios in which sales drop because of the change in warranty policies. In fact, years of warranty tends to be a determining factor ina sale, specially among certain consumer segments. The fact the author did not take this into account brings into question his whole case and hurts the conclusion. Customer insigth from research or focus groups providing more data about the possible consequences would have helped strengthen the argument.
Furthermore, the author is almost completely ignoring the consumer loyalty factor. It is well-known that good customer service helps keep the customers satisfied and improves the chances of them continuing to purchase products from that company. Limiting warranties and decreasing the quality of customer support can gravely hurt the brand name. However, this argument seems to view this factor as not relevant, therefore assuming that no disadvantageous consequences will occur. This further diminishes the argument's validity.
Also, the argument seems to be solely based on the author's own views and opinions, as no actual data is presented to support the case. With no solid information backing the argument, the conclusion is then widely vulnerable to doubts and unanswerable questions, rendering it greatly weak.
Taking all if these points into account, we can conclude that the argument is severely flawed in its logic and basis, thus being unsuccessful in its main objective of convincing the reader. If more solid information and data supporting the author's conclusions would have been provided, the argument would probably have at least made a legitimate case.
Could you guys please help me with some feedback on this essay response?
Any help will be truly appreciated!
Many thanks in advance!
Mario
Question:
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Essay:
The previous argument contains several logical flaws which reduce the conclusion's legitimacy. Primarily, the author relies on unfounded assumptions and ignores potential negative outcomes.
Firstly, the argument is entirely based on a very bold assumption: that limiting the product's warranty will have no impact on sales. As the aim is improving the profit margins, it would be quite natural to think about possible negative scenarios in which sales drop because of the change in warranty policies. In fact, years of warranty tends to be a determining factor ina sale, specially among certain consumer segments. The fact the author did not take this into account brings into question his whole case and hurts the conclusion. Customer insigth from research or focus groups providing more data about the possible consequences would have helped strengthen the argument.
Furthermore, the author is almost completely ignoring the consumer loyalty factor. It is well-known that good customer service helps keep the customers satisfied and improves the chances of them continuing to purchase products from that company. Limiting warranties and decreasing the quality of customer support can gravely hurt the brand name. However, this argument seems to view this factor as not relevant, therefore assuming that no disadvantageous consequences will occur. This further diminishes the argument's validity.
Also, the argument seems to be solely based on the author's own views and opinions, as no actual data is presented to support the case. With no solid information backing the argument, the conclusion is then widely vulnerable to doubts and unanswerable questions, rendering it greatly weak.
Taking all if these points into account, we can conclude that the argument is severely flawed in its logic and basis, thus being unsuccessful in its main objective of convincing the reader. If more solid information and data supporting the author's conclusions would have been provided, the argument would probably have at least made a legitimate case.
Moderators:
