• EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep

Analysis of an Argument - Please rate

This topic has 2 member replies

Please rate

6
 
0% (0 votes)
5
 
28% (2 votes)
4
 
14% (1 votes)
3
 
42% (3 votes)
2
 
14% (1 votes)
1
 
0% (0 votes)
mehravikas Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
12 May 2008
Posted:
1161 messages
Followed by:
1 members
Thanked:
23 times
Test Date:
********
Target GMAT Score:
740

Analysis of an Argument - Please rate

Post Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:50 pm
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

    "Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper."


    The author concludes that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is due to the low priced newspaper, The Bugle. The author's line of reasoning is that the best way to increase the circulation of The Mercury's newspaper is to reduce its price below that of the Bugle, and the increased circulation will also attract more businesses to buy advertising in the paper. The author's reasoning is questionable for several reasons.

    First of all the author's reasoning is based on a questionable assumption that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is only because of a competing low price newspaper in the market. The author does not mentions how wide is the price gap between the two newspapers or to be precise is cost the only factor which has led the consumers to opt for a low priced newspaper? Moreover considering the narrow variation in the cost of the newspapers in the market, the truth of this claim is highly unlikely.

    Secondly the author assumes that by reducing the current price of the newspaper, The Mercury will be able to compete with The Bulge. Again, however the author ignores the other critical factors which might have led to a decline in sales in the last five years. Also, the author does not consider whether the decline has been overall or the sale is affected only in some parts. It seems equally reasonable to assume that sales have only declined in some areas of the country, where the marketing of The Bulge has been aggressive than the marketing of The Mercury. If this were so, it would long way to explain the reason of decline in sales.

    Finally, the author fails to consider the news coverage, the most important part of any newspaper to be successful. It could be a case, that the news, stories, encyclopaedia of The Bulge is better than that of The Mercury. If this were so, then reducing the price of The Mercury will not help in an increase in the circulation since the consumers would be interested in the content of the newspaper rather than its cost. Because the author's argument lacks the validity of the sampling method used to conclude the declension in The Mercury's sales, it is impossible to assess the persuasiveness of the argument.

    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The author would have to provide additional evidence that the news contents of the The Mercury are at par with those of The Bulge. Before coming to any conclusion and further decision regarding reduction in prices, the publication should also survey to get the additional evidence that what makes readers to switch to The Bulge. Without this additional evidence the argument does not supports the assumption pointed out by the author.

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    sanjaysmart Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts Default Avatar
    Joined
    20 Oct 2008
    Posted:
    28 messages
    Thanked:
    5 times
    Post Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:00 pm
    mehravikas wrote:
    The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

    "Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper."


    The author concludes that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is due to the low priced newspaper, The Bugle. The author's line of reasoning is that the best way to increase the circulation of The Mercury's newspaper is to reduce its price below that of the Bugle, and the increased circulation will also attract more businesses to buy advertising in the paper. The author's reasoning is questionable for several reasons.

    First of all the author's reasoning is based on a questionable assumption that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is only because of a competing low price newspaper in the market. The author does not mentions how wide is the price gap between the two newspapers or to be precise is cost the only factor which has led the consumers to opt for a low priced newspaper? Moreover considering the narrow variation in the cost of the newspapers in the market, the truth of this claim is highly unlikely.

    Secondly the author assumes that by reducing the current price of the newspaper, The Mercury will be able to compete with The Bulge. Again, however the author ignores the other critical factors which might have led to a decline in sales in the last five years. Also, the author does not consider whether the decline has been overall or the sale is affected only in some parts. It seems equally reasonable to assume that sales have only declined in some areas of the country, where the marketing of The Bulge has been aggressive than the marketing of The Mercury. If this were so, it would long way to explain the reason of decline in sales.

    Finally, the author fails to consider the news coverage, the most important part of any newspaper to be successful. It could be a case, that the news, stories, encyclopaedia of The Bulge is better than that of The Mercury. If this were so, then reducing the price of The Mercury will not help in an increase in the circulation since the consumers would be interested in the content of the newspaper rather than its cost. Because the author's argument lacks the validity of the sampling method used to conclude the declension in The Mercury's sales, it is impossible to assess the persuasiveness of the argument.

    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The author would have to provide additional evidence that the news contents of the The Mercury are at par with those of The Bulge. Before coming to any conclusion and further decision regarding reduction in prices, the publication should also survey to get the additional evidence that what makes readers to switch to The Bulge. Without this additional evidence the argument does not supports the assumption pointed out by the author.
    Hi Mehra Vikas, I think that the other voter has been unduly harsh by giving you a score of just 3. I think that you have addressed the 'Argumentum Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc' adequately as is the case with the analogy. However, yoiu have missed the statistical fallacy in the stimulus. A decline of 10,000 can be either large or small depending on the total number of people who read this paper before the cheaper paper started. If the total readership i9s in millions, the conclusion is quite valid because the decline is small and does not warrant such wholesale changes. However, if the number of people who read the newspaper before the cheaper alternative started out was small, the argument is quite valid. The author's use of evidence is quite inadequate because he has not mentioned what the total readership was before the 'Bugle' was launched.
    Lastly, your essay provides a bit of comic relief when it refers to the Bugle as the 'Bulge'. LOL.

    mehravikas Legendary Member Default Avatar
    Joined
    12 May 2008
    Posted:
    1161 messages
    Followed by:
    1 members
    Thanked:
    23 times
    Test Date:
    ********
    Target GMAT Score:
    740
    Post Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:22 pm
    Thanks Sanjay....for pointing out the mistake Smile

    sanjaysmart wrote:
    mehravikas wrote:
    The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:

    "Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper."


    The author concludes that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is due to the low priced newspaper, The Bugle. The author's line of reasoning is that the best way to increase the circulation of The Mercury's newspaper is to reduce its price below that of the Bugle, and the increased circulation will also attract more businesses to buy advertising in the paper. The author's reasoning is questionable for several reasons.

    First of all the author's reasoning is based on a questionable assumption that the decline in the sale of The Mercury's newspaper is only because of a competing low price newspaper in the market. The author does not mentions how wide is the price gap between the two newspapers or to be precise is cost the only factor which has led the consumers to opt for a low priced newspaper? Moreover considering the narrow variation in the cost of the newspapers in the market, the truth of this claim is highly unlikely.

    Secondly the author assumes that by reducing the current price of the newspaper, The Mercury will be able to compete with The Bulge. Again, however the author ignores the other critical factors which might have led to a decline in sales in the last five years. Also, the author does not consider whether the decline has been overall or the sale is affected only in some parts. It seems equally reasonable to assume that sales have only declined in some areas of the country, where the marketing of The Bulge has been aggressive than the marketing of The Mercury. If this were so, it would long way to explain the reason of decline in sales.

    Finally, the author fails to consider the news coverage, the most important part of any newspaper to be successful. It could be a case, that the news, stories, encyclopaedia of The Bulge is better than that of The Mercury. If this were so, then reducing the price of The Mercury will not help in an increase in the circulation since the consumers would be interested in the content of the newspaper rather than its cost. Because the author's argument lacks the validity of the sampling method used to conclude the declension in The Mercury's sales, it is impossible to assess the persuasiveness of the argument.

    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The author would have to provide additional evidence that the news contents of the The Mercury are at par with those of The Bulge. Before coming to any conclusion and further decision regarding reduction in prices, the publication should also survey to get the additional evidence that what makes readers to switch to The Bulge. Without this additional evidence the argument does not supports the assumption pointed out by the author.
    Hi Mehra Vikas, I think that the other voter has been unduly harsh by giving you a score of just 3. I think that you have addressed the 'Argumentum Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc' adequately as is the case with the analogy. However, yoiu have missed the statistical fallacy in the stimulus. A decline of 10,000 can be either large or small depending on the total number of people who read this paper before the cheaper paper started. If the total readership i9s in millions, the conclusion is quite valid because the decline is small and does not warrant such wholesale changes. However, if the number of people who read the newspaper before the cheaper alternative started out was small, the argument is quite valid. The author's use of evidence is quite inadequate because he has not mentioned what the total readership was before the 'Bugle' was launched.
    Lastly, your essay provides a bit of comic relief when it refers to the Bugle as the 'Bulge'. LOL.

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 Vincen 180 topics
    2 lheiannie07 61 topics
    3 Roland2rule 61 topics
    4 ardz24 40 topics
    5 VJesus12 14 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    160 posts
    2 image description Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

    EMPOWERgmat

    102 posts
    3 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    99 posts
    4 image description Jay@ManhattanReview

    Manhattan Review

    86 posts
    5 image description Matt@VeritasPrep

    Veritas Prep

    80 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts