GMAT Essays (AWA)

Hello,

Can you please rate this essay? Thanks - Sri


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a corporate memorandum of a beverage manufacturer:

"Our promotional price reductions on energy drinks have been highly successful, as we have seen a dramatic increase in unit sales. Further, surveys of our consumers indicate that this promotion was favorably received by the majority of our customers. Therefore, to improve our company's profitability and enhance its perception in the eyes of consumers, similar price reductions should be offered on all drinks produced by our firm."

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.

YOUR RESPONSE:

Offering discounts on products is a strategy that has been used to entice customers for a while now. There are those companies that always offer products on discounts whereas there are corporations that offer discounts only on new products. In the preceding argument the author is saying that because the promotional price reductions offered on energy drinks have been highly successful the beverage manufacturer should start offering similar price reductions on all drinks produced by them. Though the author's claim does have some merit, he presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions and based solely on the evidence that he offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. Just because the promotional price reductions on energy drinks have been highly successful does not mean that price reductions would work even for existing beverages. The author has not mentioned anything about the energy drinks which had price reductions. The promotions on the energy drinks might have been highly successful just because those specific energy drinks might have been around for a while and might be popular among customers. As a result, the surveys might have also been very favorable. This might not happen for other beverages which get discounted. The author's premises, the basis for his argument is based on some questionable facts and hence they render his argument unacceptable.

In addition, the author makes some questionable assumptions. Just because price reductions have worked on some energy drinks does not mean that they have to work for all beverages. The one's that saw a dramatic increase in unit sales might have been very popular anyway. This does not mean that any beverage whose price is reduced will also sell as well. Also, just because some surveys of customers indicated that the promotion was favorably received does not mean that all surveys in the future will be so favorable. In-fact there is a danger here that if some drinks don't sell well despite price discounts, the surveys will be a lot negative. This will in turn damage the company's perception and erode it's brand. The author thus weakens his argument by making several questionable assumptions and by not explicating clearly why the links between X and Y exist.

Though the author makes his argument with several unsubstantiated premises and unproven assumptions that is not to say that his argument is totally invalid. He could strengthen his argument by giving some background details about the drinks whose prices were discounted, general customer perception of the company and some more details about the overall popularity of all the beverages as such that the company produces. By fixing the flaws in his logic, providing more details as to how X produces Y and providing more information and clarification, the author can convince us the reader to accept his argument.

In-sum, based solely on the evidence that the author offers we cannot accept his argument as valid. The author must largely restructure his argument, strengthen his premises and provide more valid assumptions for us to accept his argument.