PROMPT:
The following appeared as part of a promotional campaign to sell advertising space in the Daily Gazette to grocery
stores in the Marston area:
"Advertising the reduced price of selected grocery items in the Daily Gazette will help you increase your sales.
Consider the results of a study conducted last month. Thirty sale items from a store in downtown Marston were advertised in The Gazette for four days. Each time one or more of the 30 items was purchased, clerks asked whether the shopper had read the ad. Two-thirds of the 200 shoppers asked answered in the affirmative. Furthermore, more than half the customers who answered in the affirmative spent over $100 at the store."
Discuss how well reasoned etc.
MY ANSWER:
Advertising increases awareness of the product to those who are unfamiliar with the products but this can be both negative or positive. Negative when it tries to sell something which can be hazardous like alcholol and positive when it gives information about such as new variety of seeds to farmers.
In the preceding statements author states that Advertisement will affect in a positive way to the store and will increse the sales. Though the claim may have some merit but here it is poorly substantiated with premises and assumtions. Based solely on the information given above, we cannot accept the argument.
Facts given above are from the study that shows only one part of the story. It states that the majority of the customers who read the article made a purchase, but what about if they are the customers who always read that space for advertisement and are aware of these products. If this is the case then no new information is added to them and they make their usual purchase and no value
addtion to the store. Also to add if these customers shop anyways for this product then advertisement is a waste of money for the store as it increses the cost. If the adjacent store doesn't advertise and sell the same products at a reduced cost then the customers will drift to that store to save money. Another point missing is if the one-third customers who answered in negative and if they never read the advertisement then again it's not working for the store to keep on the spening on the advertisement.
Not to say that the entire reasoning the author gave lacks merit. It can however be improved if supported by the below points. Primarily if the study can prove that the advertisements have pulled
new customers to the store who haven't previously shopped there and were not aware of these products then definetly advertisent had its intented effect of increasing sales and should be continued by the store.
To sum it up based on only the facts mentioned by the author this reasoning cannot be accepted by all but if it include the points mentioned above it will be widely accepted.
The following appeared as part of a promotional campaign to sell advertising space in the Daily Gazette to grocery
stores in the Marston area:
"Advertising the reduced price of selected grocery items in the Daily Gazette will help you increase your sales.
Consider the results of a study conducted last month. Thirty sale items from a store in downtown Marston were advertised in The Gazette for four days. Each time one or more of the 30 items was purchased, clerks asked whether the shopper had read the ad. Two-thirds of the 200 shoppers asked answered in the affirmative. Furthermore, more than half the customers who answered in the affirmative spent over $100 at the store."
Discuss how well reasoned etc.
MY ANSWER:
Advertising increases awareness of the product to those who are unfamiliar with the products but this can be both negative or positive. Negative when it tries to sell something which can be hazardous like alcholol and positive when it gives information about such as new variety of seeds to farmers.
In the preceding statements author states that Advertisement will affect in a positive way to the store and will increse the sales. Though the claim may have some merit but here it is poorly substantiated with premises and assumtions. Based solely on the information given above, we cannot accept the argument.
Facts given above are from the study that shows only one part of the story. It states that the majority of the customers who read the article made a purchase, but what about if they are the customers who always read that space for advertisement and are aware of these products. If this is the case then no new information is added to them and they make their usual purchase and no value
addtion to the store. Also to add if these customers shop anyways for this product then advertisement is a waste of money for the store as it increses the cost. If the adjacent store doesn't advertise and sell the same products at a reduced cost then the customers will drift to that store to save money. Another point missing is if the one-third customers who answered in negative and if they never read the advertisement then again it's not working for the store to keep on the spening on the advertisement.
Not to say that the entire reasoning the author gave lacks merit. It can however be improved if supported by the below points. Primarily if the study can prove that the advertisements have pulled
new customers to the store who haven't previously shopped there and were not aware of these products then definetly advertisent had its intented effect of increasing sales and should be continued by the store.
To sum it up based on only the facts mentioned by the author this reasoning cannot be accepted by all but if it include the points mentioned above it will be widely accepted.
