Analysis of an Argument, tks for the rating and the support

This topic has expert replies

Score

4
1
33%
4.5
1
33%
5
1
33%
5.5
0
No votes
6
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 3

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:40 pm
Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has decreased 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 above article tries to explain the reasons behind the declining readership of The Mercury during the past five years, with a conclusion that pricing the Mercury below the price of The Bugle will bring back readership as well as advertising revenue. While there is a certain but weak logic behind this argument, many other factors that need to be properly considered before this argument can be a logical one.

Primary, lowering the current price of The Mercury may not necessarily increase its competitiveness against The Bugle. Readers may choose The Bugle simply because it covers more interesting topics and the editorials are more sophisticated. Under such scenario, lower pricing will not bring back any meaningful readership but only causing financial damage to The Mercury.

Secondary, the overall size of newspaper readership can be dropping over the past five years due to the increasing popularity of web news portals. Traditional newspaper readers may find the online alternatives more frequently updated, with more events and information at almost zero subscription cost. Those fundamental differences between the paper and web media can not be addressed by simply lowering the price.

Finally, the assumption that more businesses will buy advertising space in The Bugle after the readership normalises is not necessarily true. Along with the readers, smart businesses are also moving towards the new mass media of internet which is better at capturing relevant potential consumers, leaving traditional newspapers as a secondary choice of advertising.

As above, there are further facts and analysis that the author should consider before reaching the current view. Such facts can include results from any reader survey of The Bugle or The Mercury, as well as feedbacks from interviewing with The Mercury's existing advertising customer.

User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:51 pm
Thanked: 24 times
Followed by:7 members
GMAT Score:750

by havok » Thu May 05, 2011 4:26 pm
kongb wrote:Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has decreased 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 above article tries to explain the reasons behind the declining readership of The Mercury during the past five years, with a conclusion that pricing the Mercury below the price of The Bugle will bring back readership as well as advertising revenue. While there is a certain but weak logic behind this argument, many other factors that need to be properly considered before this argument can be a logical one.

Primary, lowering the current price of The Mercury may not necessarily increase its competitiveness against The Bugle. Readers may choose The Bugle simply because it covers more interesting topics and the editorials are more sophisticated. Under such scenario, lower pricing will not bring back any meaningful readership but only causing financial damage to The Mercury.

Secondary, the overall size of newspaper readership can be dropping over the past five years due to the increasing popularity of web news portals. Traditional newspaper readers may find the online alternatives more frequently updated, with more events and information at almost zero subscription cost. Those fundamental differences between the paper and web media can not be addressed by simply lowering the price.

Finally, the assumption that more businesses will buy advertising space in The Bugle after the readership normalises is not necessarily true. Along with the readers, smart businesses are also moving towards the new mass media of internet which is better at capturing relevant potential consumers, leaving traditional newspapers as a secondary choice of advertising.

As above, there are further facts and analysis that the author should consider before reaching the current view. Such facts can include results from any reader survey of The Bugle or The Mercury, as well as feedbacks from interviewing with The Mercury's existing advertising customer.
I feel there is a lot of good ideas in this analysis, you have broken down the author's argument and carefully dissected the weaknesses in the statement. Given that, there are also some weaknesses - namely, the overall writing structure, misspellings, and grammatical problems. I'm not sure how much that counts on the GMAT, but I know one of the main points of the AWA is to prove that you have a "grasp" of the English language.

I'm not sure this essay reflects that skill fully. "Primary" and "Secondary" supposed to be followed up "issue" (The primary issue is), starting with "Primary," doesn't mean anything. In any case, I would work on trying to get a steady grasp of style and technique in order to score in the ranges that you've provided above.