Prompt :
"Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers - some say because its products lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine roar on the sound track."
The argument compares American made Motorcycle X with a foreign Motorcycle that has been modeled by copying Motorcycle X. In spite of being a copy, the duplicate model has not been able to attract the customers of Motorcycle X. The author tries to investigate the reason behind this. In doing so, he compares the sales of the Motorcycles to that of cars , which are 2 completely different entities. The author also brings to notice some information about how Motorcycle X has been advertised without providing any such information about the copied version. As there are a number of logical flaws which we will discuss in more detail, the argument is weak and insufficient.
The author seemingly degrades the claims made by some that the lack of noise in the engine of the copied version could be one of the factors influencing its inability to attract the customers of Motorcycle X. The author's explanation is not strong enough as he compares the difference in the noise levels of the Motorcycles to that of Cars. It is well known that Motorcyclists are generally more attracted to noisier motorcycles than silent ones. So comparing that with noise levels of Cars, whose owners on the other hand generally prefer more smooth and silent engines does not really serve the author well.
Some information is provided regarding the advertising strategies used by Motorcycle X, whereas no such information is provided about the copied model. This is a clear case of insufficient information. Without any knowledge about how the copied Motorcycle advertised themselves it would be unfair to compare the two. The author could have enlightened us with some information about how the copied motorcycle advertised themselves in order to better support his claim.
The author could have summarized his content in a much better way by providing some information about the difference in the cost of the motorcycles. He could have also thrown in some data as to how many customers who had purchased Motorcycle X did so after watching the advertisements.
Because the argument fails in making a more sensible comparison in the noise levels of the two motorcycles and also provides insufficient information with regards to the advertising strategies involved, we can conclude that it is weak and unsatisfactory.
"Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for over 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers - some say because its products lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine roar on the sound track."
The argument compares American made Motorcycle X with a foreign Motorcycle that has been modeled by copying Motorcycle X. In spite of being a copy, the duplicate model has not been able to attract the customers of Motorcycle X. The author tries to investigate the reason behind this. In doing so, he compares the sales of the Motorcycles to that of cars , which are 2 completely different entities. The author also brings to notice some information about how Motorcycle X has been advertised without providing any such information about the copied version. As there are a number of logical flaws which we will discuss in more detail, the argument is weak and insufficient.
The author seemingly degrades the claims made by some that the lack of noise in the engine of the copied version could be one of the factors influencing its inability to attract the customers of Motorcycle X. The author's explanation is not strong enough as he compares the difference in the noise levels of the Motorcycles to that of Cars. It is well known that Motorcyclists are generally more attracted to noisier motorcycles than silent ones. So comparing that with noise levels of Cars, whose owners on the other hand generally prefer more smooth and silent engines does not really serve the author well.
Some information is provided regarding the advertising strategies used by Motorcycle X, whereas no such information is provided about the copied model. This is a clear case of insufficient information. Without any knowledge about how the copied Motorcycle advertised themselves it would be unfair to compare the two. The author could have enlightened us with some information about how the copied motorcycle advertised themselves in order to better support his claim.
The author could have summarized his content in a much better way by providing some information about the difference in the cost of the motorcycles. He could have also thrown in some data as to how many customers who had purchased Motorcycle X did so after watching the advertisements.
Because the argument fails in making a more sensible comparison in the noise levels of the two motorcycles and also provides insufficient information with regards to the advertising strategies involved, we can conclude that it is weak and unsatisfactory.
