Hi,
Could you please evaluate my essay. I have scheduled my GMAT exam for the 25th of May (Monday). I've written about 5 essays till now but I am not able to assess my progress and areas for improvement.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The following appeared as part of the business plan of an investment and financial consulting firm.
"Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker's consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee."
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument claims that based on projected increase in the number of older adults over the next 20 years, since an average coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age while the average cola drinker's consumption of cola reduces with age, the company must transfer its investments from its cola arm to its coffee arm. The argument clearly manipulates facts and relies on numerous unwarranted assumptions, thereby conveying a distorted view of the situation. The author also reveals examples of leap of faith, ill-defined terminology and poor reasoning, rendering the overall argument fallacious and unsubstantiated.
First, the argument relies on the assumption that since the trend of declining cola consumption and increasing coffee consumption, as a person ages, held true over the past 40 years, the same will continue to hold true over the next 20 years. The author clearly reveals an example of leap of faith here and does not account for changes in circumstances that may happen going forward. For example, studies may later demonstrate that consumption of coffee at older ages may not be healthy and this may, in turn, lead to a drastic reduction in the consumption of the beverage. The author also assumes that there will not be any new beverage that may come to dominate an older person's beverage consumption in the future. Therefore, the argument relies heavily on unsubstantiated assumptions and would have been more clearly expressed if it had accounted for such unforseen variables.
Second, the argument claims that since the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, coffee will be a better investment as compared to cola. However, in claiming so, the author fails to factor in the possibility of a corresponding increase in the number of people in younger age groups. To illustrate, the population projections may be based on projections of decreasing mortality rates, thereby resulting in a higher number of older adults in the next 20 years. However, it may also be true that the overall population may increase across all age groups. Clearly, the author draws a correlation between increase in number of older adults and corresponding decrease in number of younger adults, which is unwarranted, to enforce his or her faulty argument.
Lastly, what is the projected population in the target market for cola and how does this compare to the projected population in the target market for coffee? Further, are there any new beverages currently in the market or in development, which is anticipated to cannibalize the market share of either coffee or cola? Without answers to these questions, the argument does not have a firm footing and is vulnerable to criticism.
In conclusion, the argument relies heavily on the assumption that trends that were visible in the past shall continue to persist going forward and it would have been better substantiated with specific facts about changes in target market demographics for both products over the projection period as well as a possible market study of projected consumption trends in the beverage industry over the next 20 years. Further, the author's reliance on outstretched assumptions regarding the changes in the average population age are incorrect and not backed with suitable facts. Clearly, without the aforementioned factors being addressed, the argument renders itself fallacious and prone to criticism from different angles.
Could you please evaluate my essay. I have scheduled my GMAT exam for the 25th of May (Monday). I've written about 5 essays till now but I am not able to assess my progress and areas for improvement.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The following appeared as part of the business plan of an investment and financial consulting firm.
"Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker's consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee."
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument claims that based on projected increase in the number of older adults over the next 20 years, since an average coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age while the average cola drinker's consumption of cola reduces with age, the company must transfer its investments from its cola arm to its coffee arm. The argument clearly manipulates facts and relies on numerous unwarranted assumptions, thereby conveying a distorted view of the situation. The author also reveals examples of leap of faith, ill-defined terminology and poor reasoning, rendering the overall argument fallacious and unsubstantiated.
First, the argument relies on the assumption that since the trend of declining cola consumption and increasing coffee consumption, as a person ages, held true over the past 40 years, the same will continue to hold true over the next 20 years. The author clearly reveals an example of leap of faith here and does not account for changes in circumstances that may happen going forward. For example, studies may later demonstrate that consumption of coffee at older ages may not be healthy and this may, in turn, lead to a drastic reduction in the consumption of the beverage. The author also assumes that there will not be any new beverage that may come to dominate an older person's beverage consumption in the future. Therefore, the argument relies heavily on unsubstantiated assumptions and would have been more clearly expressed if it had accounted for such unforseen variables.
Second, the argument claims that since the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, coffee will be a better investment as compared to cola. However, in claiming so, the author fails to factor in the possibility of a corresponding increase in the number of people in younger age groups. To illustrate, the population projections may be based on projections of decreasing mortality rates, thereby resulting in a higher number of older adults in the next 20 years. However, it may also be true that the overall population may increase across all age groups. Clearly, the author draws a correlation between increase in number of older adults and corresponding decrease in number of younger adults, which is unwarranted, to enforce his or her faulty argument.
Lastly, what is the projected population in the target market for cola and how does this compare to the projected population in the target market for coffee? Further, are there any new beverages currently in the market or in development, which is anticipated to cannibalize the market share of either coffee or cola? Without answers to these questions, the argument does not have a firm footing and is vulnerable to criticism.
In conclusion, the argument relies heavily on the assumption that trends that were visible in the past shall continue to persist going forward and it would have been better substantiated with specific facts about changes in target market demographics for both products over the projection period as well as a possible market study of projected consumption trends in the beverage industry over the next 20 years. Further, the author's reliance on outstretched assumptions regarding the changes in the average population age are incorrect and not backed with suitable facts. Clearly, without the aforementioned factors being addressed, the argument renders itself fallacious and prone to criticism from different angles.
