Argument:
"Davis Technologies, a computer-chip maker, could solve its problem of declining sales by dropping its prices. This would make Davis better able to compete in the highly competitive computer chip market. The sales of chips would increase and this would substantially boost Davis' market share."
How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.
My essay:
"According to this argument the sales of Davis Technologies are declining. In order to make Davis more competitive the author suggests that the company drops its prices. I find that the conclusion of this argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence.
First, the argument assumes that sales will increase once the prices will be lowered. This statement is not convincing since the problem might not be the price, but the computer chips that the company is selling. Clearly, being competitive in the computers' world is very challenging since the technology is changing so fast. The computer chips sold by Davis might be outdated, or not as performant as the chips sold by other companies. However, this argument does not mention anything regarding the quality of Davis' chips. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the price is the real problem.
Second, the argument claims that better sales would substantially boost Davis' market share. This claim is weak again since argument did not mention anything about Davis' market share before or after its sales started to decline. In addition, there are so many new computer-chip maker companies, that it is unclear with how many percent the sales of Davis' must increase in order to have an impact on its market share. The sales will make a difference on its balance sheet, but argument does not bring any evidence which would support the "increased market share" point of view.
Finally, argument can be strengthened by stating some information about the chips that Davis technologies is making. There should be some comparison between the chips that Davis is offering to the potential buyers and the chips offered by Davis' main competitors. Data such us performance and capacity should be taken in consideration. Also, argument would be more convincing if there will be some information about Davis' current market position: what is its market share currently, how much it declined since its sales are lower? Some information about the main market share holders and how do they maintain or increase their market share will be helpful in understanding better the highly competitive computer chip market.
Therefore, this argument is seriously flawed due to the above reasons. Although, the author might have a point when stating that the prices will play an important role in Davis' sales and market share, it needs to bring supportive information. Without this information, argument remains weak and open for debate. According to this argument the sales of Davis Technologies are declining. In order to make Davis more competitive the author suggests that the company drops its prices. I find that the conclusion of this argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence.
First, the argument assumes that sales will increase once the prices will be lowered. This statement is not convincing since the problem might not be the price, but the computer chips that the company is selling. Clearly, being competitive in the computers' world is very challenging since the technology is changing so fast. The computer chips sold by Davis might be outdated, or not as performant as the chips sold by other companies. However, this argument does not mention anything regarding the quality of Davis' chips. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the price is the real problem.
Second, the argument claims that better sales would substantially boost Davis' market share. This claim is weak again since argument did not mention anything about Davis' market share before or after its sales started to decline. In addition, there are so many new computer-chip maker companies, that it is unclear with how many percent the sales of Davis' must increase in order to have an impact on its market share. The sales will make a difference on its balance sheet, but argument does not bring any evidence which would support the "increased market share" point of view.
Finally, argument can be strengthened by stating some information about the chips that Davis Technologies is making. There should be some comparison between the chips that Davis is offering to the potential buyers and the chips offered by Davis' main competitors. Data such us performance and capacity should be taken in consideration. Also, argument would be more convincing if there will be some information about Davis' current market position: what is its market share currently, how much it declined since its sales are lower? Some information about the main market share holders and how do they maintain or increase their market share will be helpful in understanding better the highly competitive computer chip market.
Therefore, this argument is seriously flawed due to the above reasons. Although, the author might have a point when stating that the prices will play an important role in Davis' sales and market share, it needs to bring supportive information. Without this information, argument remains weak and open for debate."
Thank you!
"Davis Technologies, a computer-chip maker, could solve its problem of declining sales by dropping its prices. This would make Davis better able to compete in the highly competitive computer chip market. The sales of chips would increase and this would substantially boost Davis' market share."
How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.
My essay:
"According to this argument the sales of Davis Technologies are declining. In order to make Davis more competitive the author suggests that the company drops its prices. I find that the conclusion of this argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence.
First, the argument assumes that sales will increase once the prices will be lowered. This statement is not convincing since the problem might not be the price, but the computer chips that the company is selling. Clearly, being competitive in the computers' world is very challenging since the technology is changing so fast. The computer chips sold by Davis might be outdated, or not as performant as the chips sold by other companies. However, this argument does not mention anything regarding the quality of Davis' chips. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the price is the real problem.
Second, the argument claims that better sales would substantially boost Davis' market share. This claim is weak again since argument did not mention anything about Davis' market share before or after its sales started to decline. In addition, there are so many new computer-chip maker companies, that it is unclear with how many percent the sales of Davis' must increase in order to have an impact on its market share. The sales will make a difference on its balance sheet, but argument does not bring any evidence which would support the "increased market share" point of view.
Finally, argument can be strengthened by stating some information about the chips that Davis technologies is making. There should be some comparison between the chips that Davis is offering to the potential buyers and the chips offered by Davis' main competitors. Data such us performance and capacity should be taken in consideration. Also, argument would be more convincing if there will be some information about Davis' current market position: what is its market share currently, how much it declined since its sales are lower? Some information about the main market share holders and how do they maintain or increase their market share will be helpful in understanding better the highly competitive computer chip market.
Therefore, this argument is seriously flawed due to the above reasons. Although, the author might have a point when stating that the prices will play an important role in Davis' sales and market share, it needs to bring supportive information. Without this information, argument remains weak and open for debate. According to this argument the sales of Davis Technologies are declining. In order to make Davis more competitive the author suggests that the company drops its prices. I find that the conclusion of this argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence.
First, the argument assumes that sales will increase once the prices will be lowered. This statement is not convincing since the problem might not be the price, but the computer chips that the company is selling. Clearly, being competitive in the computers' world is very challenging since the technology is changing so fast. The computer chips sold by Davis might be outdated, or not as performant as the chips sold by other companies. However, this argument does not mention anything regarding the quality of Davis' chips. Therefore, we cannot conclude that the price is the real problem.
Second, the argument claims that better sales would substantially boost Davis' market share. This claim is weak again since argument did not mention anything about Davis' market share before or after its sales started to decline. In addition, there are so many new computer-chip maker companies, that it is unclear with how many percent the sales of Davis' must increase in order to have an impact on its market share. The sales will make a difference on its balance sheet, but argument does not bring any evidence which would support the "increased market share" point of view.
Finally, argument can be strengthened by stating some information about the chips that Davis Technologies is making. There should be some comparison between the chips that Davis is offering to the potential buyers and the chips offered by Davis' main competitors. Data such us performance and capacity should be taken in consideration. Also, argument would be more convincing if there will be some information about Davis' current market position: what is its market share currently, how much it declined since its sales are lower? Some information about the main market share holders and how do they maintain or increase their market share will be helpful in understanding better the highly competitive computer chip market.
Therefore, this argument is seriously flawed due to the above reasons. Although, the author might have a point when stating that the prices will play an important role in Davis' sales and market share, it needs to bring supportive information. Without this information, argument remains weak and open for debate."
Thank you!
