-
savannah.hooper
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Hi everyone! This was my first attempt at an AWA. Please let me know how I did. Thanks!
Also, has anyone used the GMAT Write tool? Is it worth the $30 and how accurate is it?
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a strategy memorandum of an investment company:
"Over the past several years, investment in precious metals, such as gold and silver, has proven to be one of the most profitable investment strategies for our firm. Over the next decade, the demand for these metals is expected to be strong, largely driven by the economic growth of large emerging markets--China, India, and Russia. Thus, our investors are best served by increasing their exposure to precious metals to take advantage of this unique profit-making opportunity."
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:
The argument that increasing investment in precious metals will benefit investors relies on several assumptions and uncertainties. Though the firm states that this strategy is currently very profitable, it does not give substantial evidence to justify expanding the strategy. The statement relies on the unstable, potentially highly regulated emerging markets of China, India, Russia, and others. Overall, the argument for expanding investment in this industry is not supported by enough evidence to justify the transition to investors and other stakeholders.
Perhaps the largest flaw in the argument is its reliance on emerging markets. Since it is impossible to predict the future the company cannot justify increasing exposure to the precious metal industry because of the growth of potentially emergent markets. These markets could become highly regulated and unstable. Also, it is important to note the nature of the goods that are being dealt with. Precious metals are a nonrenewable resource that are often depleted very quickly. The growth of these emerging markets might be very short-lived. Therefore, the company cannot justify substantially reorganizing its investment portfolio in order to cash in on these unpredictable short-term gains.
Since this argument leaves out several key factors, it is not logical. If the argument would have discussed the current amount of investments that the company had in the precious metals sector and how much it would increase this amount, the argument would be stronger. Another way to increase the persuasiveness of the argument would be to include an explanation of how long the precious metal markets in the emerging markets were expected to be profitable. A time period of how long it would take to deplete the markets would be very helpful in determining if this is a long-time strategy that could benefit the firm. Overall, by adding additional measures and descriptions the investment company's argument would be much more persuasive.
Also, has anyone used the GMAT Write tool? Is it worth the $30 and how accurate is it?
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a strategy memorandum of an investment company:
"Over the past several years, investment in precious metals, such as gold and silver, has proven to be one of the most profitable investment strategies for our firm. Over the next decade, the demand for these metals is expected to be strong, largely driven by the economic growth of large emerging markets--China, India, and Russia. Thus, our investors are best served by increasing their exposure to precious metals to take advantage of this unique profit-making opportunity."
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:
The argument that increasing investment in precious metals will benefit investors relies on several assumptions and uncertainties. Though the firm states that this strategy is currently very profitable, it does not give substantial evidence to justify expanding the strategy. The statement relies on the unstable, potentially highly regulated emerging markets of China, India, Russia, and others. Overall, the argument for expanding investment in this industry is not supported by enough evidence to justify the transition to investors and other stakeholders.
Perhaps the largest flaw in the argument is its reliance on emerging markets. Since it is impossible to predict the future the company cannot justify increasing exposure to the precious metal industry because of the growth of potentially emergent markets. These markets could become highly regulated and unstable. Also, it is important to note the nature of the goods that are being dealt with. Precious metals are a nonrenewable resource that are often depleted very quickly. The growth of these emerging markets might be very short-lived. Therefore, the company cannot justify substantially reorganizing its investment portfolio in order to cash in on these unpredictable short-term gains.
Since this argument leaves out several key factors, it is not logical. If the argument would have discussed the current amount of investments that the company had in the precious metals sector and how much it would increase this amount, the argument would be stronger. Another way to increase the persuasiveness of the argument would be to include an explanation of how long the precious metal markets in the emerging markets were expected to be profitable. A time period of how long it would take to deplete the markets would be very helpful in determining if this is a long-time strategy that could benefit the firm. Overall, by adding additional measures and descriptions the investment company's argument would be much more persuasive.
