• Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
Register now and save up to $200 Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Practice Test & Review How would you score if you took the GMAT Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Trial & Practice Exam BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Veritas GMAT Class Experience Lesson 1 Live Free Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 5 Day FREE Trial Study Smarter, Not Harder Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 1 Hour Free BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Magoosh Study with Magoosh GMAT prep Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Get 300+ Practice Questions 25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 5-Day Free Trial 5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant Available with Beat the GMAT members only code ## Exam in 3 days please can I have some feedback tagged by: This topic has 4 member replies ### esssay rating 1 0% (0 votes) 2 0% (0 votes) 3 0% (0 votes) 4 0% (0 votes) 5 100% (1 votes) karen.yodaiken@gmail.com Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Joined 03 Jul 2008 Posted: 62 messages #### Exam in 3 days please can I have some feedback Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:58 am Elapsed Time: 00:00 • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME]) Group #4: Analysis of Argument DKLA was the innovator in the market for casual women's business apparel. Smith & Co. was once the leader in that market with$2 billion in sales until styles changed and Smith & Co.'s clothes went out of fashion. DKLA can also be expected to fail, especially because the market for casual women's business apparel is saturated.

Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

In the argument the author concludes that DKLA will fail as a company. this argument is weak and is based a number of faulty assumptions and fails to provide any concrete evidence that would support this conclusion

Firstly, the author makes a fallacy of faulty analogy by comparing the fact that Smith & Co lost their market edge when they failed to keep up with style changes and their clothes went out of fashion. Which caused the company to loose its leadership position. There is no evidence to support that DKLA would make the same strategic errors. In fact the author states that DKLA are innovators which suggests that they are ahead of the time.

Secondly the author states that the market is saturated which is why DKLA is expected to fail. This is faulty and contradicts the authors statement that DKLA are the leaders in the market. One does not follow from the other. This statement would apply to a new company that is still trying to establish its place in the market but not to a leader in the market.

In conclusion the author would need to provide more evidence that suggests that DKLA are not making any efforts to stay up to date with changing fashion if he or she wanted to strengthen the argument that the company would fail. The evidence provided above does not build a strong case for the argument.

Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
VP_Jim GMAT Instructor
Joined
01 May 2008
Posted:
1223 messages
Followed by:
13 members
Thanked:
185 times
Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:05 pm
What you have is good - just try to write more of it. You did an excellent job spotting some errors in the author's logic, but your discussion could be more in depth. Spend an extra sentence or two in each paragraph explaining the error in logic in more detail. Also, try to be more specific/detailed regarding how the author could strengthen the argument. Finally, aim for three body paragraphs (each one discussing a different error in the author's logic).

_________________
Jim S. | GMAT Instructor | Veritas Prep

VP_Jim GMAT Instructor
Joined
01 May 2008
Posted:
1223 messages
Followed by:
13 members
Thanked:
185 times
Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:05 pm
Oh, right, you probably want a score!

I'll give this a 4, but you have the potential to get a 5 or 6.

_________________
Jim S. | GMAT Instructor | Veritas Prep

karen.yodaiken@gmail.com Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Joined
03 Jul 2008
Posted:
62 messages
Tue Aug 12, 2008 11:45 pm
Hey Jim - thanks for the feedback!

avnikajain Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Posted:
8 messages
Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:41 am
Here is a response to the same question. I couldn't think of many points. Could you suggest some? And please give feedback for this essay.

The argument claims that DKLA is expected to fail in the casual women's business apparel market, as a result of saturating demand. This claim is based on the premise that Smith & Co., which was once the leader in this market, failed when its clothes went out of fashion. This argument is fallacious for the following reasons.

First, a saturated market market may imply that the demand is stagnant. It may or may not involve changing styles. It is not clear why a stagnant demand should lead to the failure of a company. In this case, DKLA has been an innovator in the past and may continue to innovate and thus, its clothes would still appeal to women. Thus, DKLA only needs to maintain its market share, or prevent it from dropping too low, to remain profitable. If on the other hand, it had been stated that the company would not innovate, and its clothes would soon go out of fashion, it would be reasonable to conclude that DKLA would fail.

Second, if the saturation of the market is suggested in terms of innovation, that is, no further innovation is possible in the market for women's clothing, then too, the conclusion is not logically drawn. If this is the case, DKLA can very well stop innovating and continue to sell the same style of clothes that it has been selling. There is no reason given that suggests that DKLA would fail in such a scenraio.

Finally, Smith & Co. may have failed because it failed to adapt to the change in demand. But nothing in the argument suggests that DKLA would do the same. Thus, the conclusion is far-fetched and poorly supported by the evidence.

In conclusion, the argument that DKLA would fail is vulnerable to criticism for the above mentioned reasons. If it included the points mentioned above, such as whether the clothes sold by DKLA would go out of fashion, it would be more persuasive.

### Best Conversation Starters

1 LUANDATO 138 topics
2 lheiannie07 91 topics
3 Roland2rule 79 topics
4 AAPL 71 topics
5 swerve 66 topics
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

### Most Active Experts

1 EconomistGMATTutor

The Economist GMAT Tutor

160 posts
2 Jay@ManhattanReview

Manhattan Review

128 posts
3 GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

125 posts
4 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

118 posts
5 Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

114 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts