Hello GMAT experts!
I preparing for my GMAT and it's quite a ways away, however I could use all the help I can to get the best score possible.
I am open to all constructive feedback, suggestions, thoughts, opinions, and anything else that might help me write a better essay.
Thank you!
-Mike
===================================================================================================================
Prompt: The following appeared as part of a campaign to sell advertising time on a local radio station to local businesses.
"The Cumquat Café began advertising on our local radio station this year and was delighted to see its business increase by 10 percent over last year's totals. Their success shows you how you can use radio advertising to make your business more profitable."
The argument claims that advertising on their local radio station will make businesses more profitable. This conclusion is clearly flawed by providing weak evidence, false assumptions and errors in causality.
The primary issue with the argument is the lack of evidentiary details in defining success for Cumquat Café. By seeing a 10 percent increase in business compared to last year's totals seems good by any standard, however it fails to mention whether other variables were involved. For example, the store may have given discounts and promotions throughout the year in addition to advertising with the local radio station. This could have impacted the volume of business that may have resulted in the 10 percent increase. Additionally, the campaign fails to mention whether the café advertised on other mediums, such as television and print. This could have an impact on their business just as much as advertising on the local radio station. Also, what types of metrics were measured in defining the 10 percent increase of business over last year's totals? Was it measuring an increase in foot traffic, profits, revenue, or some other type of business value? Without taking other factors into consideration when evaluating the 10 percent increase in business and defining the specific metrics measured to reach that conclusion, it is unlikely that the advertising campaign alone contributed to the success of the business.
The secondary problem with the argument is the false assumption that one business's success will result in other business's being more profitable. This statement is clearly without merit, as not all businesses are alike. For instance, Microsoft is a well-established brand and company throughout the United States. When they run advertising campaigns, it is most likely that people can resonate or identify the company and trust their product, therefore increasing profits. However, if a very small business were to advertise the same way, no one would recognize the brand and it may have little to no impact, and experience a negative profit. Therefore, claiming that using radio advertising can make your business more profitable is a false assumption because not all businesses are alike and experience success differently.
If the argument were to provide some evidentiary details on how Cumquat Café saw an increase in business by 10 percent, it would help strengthen the claim. By stating that no other promotions, discounts, population increase, or any other variables were a factor throughout the year while the advertisement was running on the local radio station, it would indicate without question that the advertisement was a success. By eliminating "noise", you are able to define and measure the one thing that is consistent, in this case the radio station advertisement, and be able to pinpoint success on that basis alone. Additionally, if the argument were to provide more case studies of other success stories in all different types of industries, could warrant the claim that it could make their business more profitable. Using only one example of "success" and not defining what "success" is, falsifies the claim and makes it unrealistic. However, having a significant amount of success stories and showing repeated instances of other types of businesses being more profitable after advertising on the radio station, can provide a stronger justification that it does, in fact, promote business growth.
In conclusion, the argument has flaws due to the lack of strong evidentiary support by failing to describe what is "success" and also provides false assumptions that all businesses are alike, therefore it cannot be trusted. If the author is able to define specific metrics to justify the 10 percent increase in business, clearly define success and provide more case studies of repeated success while advertising on the radio station, then the argument may be deemed stronger.
I preparing for my GMAT and it's quite a ways away, however I could use all the help I can to get the best score possible.
I am open to all constructive feedback, suggestions, thoughts, opinions, and anything else that might help me write a better essay.
Thank you!
-Mike
===================================================================================================================
Prompt: The following appeared as part of a campaign to sell advertising time on a local radio station to local businesses.
"The Cumquat Café began advertising on our local radio station this year and was delighted to see its business increase by 10 percent over last year's totals. Their success shows you how you can use radio advertising to make your business more profitable."
The argument claims that advertising on their local radio station will make businesses more profitable. This conclusion is clearly flawed by providing weak evidence, false assumptions and errors in causality.
The primary issue with the argument is the lack of evidentiary details in defining success for Cumquat Café. By seeing a 10 percent increase in business compared to last year's totals seems good by any standard, however it fails to mention whether other variables were involved. For example, the store may have given discounts and promotions throughout the year in addition to advertising with the local radio station. This could have impacted the volume of business that may have resulted in the 10 percent increase. Additionally, the campaign fails to mention whether the café advertised on other mediums, such as television and print. This could have an impact on their business just as much as advertising on the local radio station. Also, what types of metrics were measured in defining the 10 percent increase of business over last year's totals? Was it measuring an increase in foot traffic, profits, revenue, or some other type of business value? Without taking other factors into consideration when evaluating the 10 percent increase in business and defining the specific metrics measured to reach that conclusion, it is unlikely that the advertising campaign alone contributed to the success of the business.
The secondary problem with the argument is the false assumption that one business's success will result in other business's being more profitable. This statement is clearly without merit, as not all businesses are alike. For instance, Microsoft is a well-established brand and company throughout the United States. When they run advertising campaigns, it is most likely that people can resonate or identify the company and trust their product, therefore increasing profits. However, if a very small business were to advertise the same way, no one would recognize the brand and it may have little to no impact, and experience a negative profit. Therefore, claiming that using radio advertising can make your business more profitable is a false assumption because not all businesses are alike and experience success differently.
If the argument were to provide some evidentiary details on how Cumquat Café saw an increase in business by 10 percent, it would help strengthen the claim. By stating that no other promotions, discounts, population increase, or any other variables were a factor throughout the year while the advertisement was running on the local radio station, it would indicate without question that the advertisement was a success. By eliminating "noise", you are able to define and measure the one thing that is consistent, in this case the radio station advertisement, and be able to pinpoint success on that basis alone. Additionally, if the argument were to provide more case studies of other success stories in all different types of industries, could warrant the claim that it could make their business more profitable. Using only one example of "success" and not defining what "success" is, falsifies the claim and makes it unrealistic. However, having a significant amount of success stories and showing repeated instances of other types of businesses being more profitable after advertising on the radio station, can provide a stronger justification that it does, in fact, promote business growth.
In conclusion, the argument has flaws due to the lack of strong evidentiary support by failing to describe what is "success" and also provides false assumptions that all businesses are alike, therefore it cannot be trusted. If the author is able to define specific metrics to justify the 10 percent increase in business, clearly define success and provide more case studies of repeated success while advertising on the radio station, then the argument may be deemed stronger.
