Hello Experts
I am following the 60 days study guide, which I found very helpful for the cause. Today I am writing my first essay. Can you please check this once and provide me with a suitable opinions. This the 5th Essay of OG -13. Thanks in adavnce
The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper: "Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
The passage describes measure to be taken by an old newspaper, The Mercury, in order to increase its circulation, when faced with stiff competition by a low priced newspaper, the Bugle. The bugle is priced at a lower range than the Mercury, and thus the management of The Mercury has a reason to believe that, lowering price will again increase their circulation. Although the argument has some merits, a number of defects in the assumption make the argument seriously flawed
First of all the argument fails to identify key reasons behind the fall of the circulation of The Mercury. It is very unlikely, that readers will buy a newspaper, only because its price is low compared to some well-established newspaper. The paper has to have, similar or better set of article to be covered in it as well as the number of topics covered should be vast enough, for readers to choose the newspaper. Also it may happen that, The Bugle may be focusing on a very specific area of the news, where The Mercury has little or no focus, for example news relevant for young generations. It is also very likely that The Bugle might have applied an aggressive marketing campaign in order to capture a definitive market share, whereas being established The Mercury paid little attention in advertising. Without considering these aspects, just reducing the price may have adverse effect on the newspaper itself. It can very well happen that even after price is reduced, still the circulation does not go up. Hence the idea of bringing the circulation in same place as before and then realizing the incurred losses through published advertisement in the paper may face serious jeopardy.
In order to avoid such condition, The Mercury must carry out a market survey in first place, to understand the key factors behind its fall in circulation. In order to bring the competitiveness in market, The Mercury should also take measure based on the results of the survey. The survey should target the general readers, who have recently migrated to The Bugle, in order to find out what caused this shift in readership choice. Without considering the readers opinion, just by reducing the price not only puts the overall plan into jeopardy, but also puts the competitiveness of the newspaper in the market into serious question.
I am following the 60 days study guide, which I found very helpful for the cause. Today I am writing my first essay. Can you please check this once and provide me with a suitable opinions. This the 5th Essay of OG -13. Thanks in adavnce
The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper: "Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury's circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels. The increased circulation of The Mercury will attract more businesses to buy advertising space in the paper."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
The passage describes measure to be taken by an old newspaper, The Mercury, in order to increase its circulation, when faced with stiff competition by a low priced newspaper, the Bugle. The bugle is priced at a lower range than the Mercury, and thus the management of The Mercury has a reason to believe that, lowering price will again increase their circulation. Although the argument has some merits, a number of defects in the assumption make the argument seriously flawed
First of all the argument fails to identify key reasons behind the fall of the circulation of The Mercury. It is very unlikely, that readers will buy a newspaper, only because its price is low compared to some well-established newspaper. The paper has to have, similar or better set of article to be covered in it as well as the number of topics covered should be vast enough, for readers to choose the newspaper. Also it may happen that, The Bugle may be focusing on a very specific area of the news, where The Mercury has little or no focus, for example news relevant for young generations. It is also very likely that The Bugle might have applied an aggressive marketing campaign in order to capture a definitive market share, whereas being established The Mercury paid little attention in advertising. Without considering these aspects, just reducing the price may have adverse effect on the newspaper itself. It can very well happen that even after price is reduced, still the circulation does not go up. Hence the idea of bringing the circulation in same place as before and then realizing the incurred losses through published advertisement in the paper may face serious jeopardy.
In order to avoid such condition, The Mercury must carry out a market survey in first place, to understand the key factors behind its fall in circulation. In order to bring the competitiveness in market, The Mercury should also take measure based on the results of the survey. The survey should target the general readers, who have recently migrated to The Bugle, in order to find out what caused this shift in readership choice. Without considering the readers opinion, just by reducing the price not only puts the overall plan into jeopardy, but also puts the competitiveness of the newspaper in the market into serious question.
