AA #9, which style is better?

robertchu

Hi, I wrote two versions for AA#9 at different time, but
I'm having a hard time determining which version is better.
Version 1 is shorter, version 2 is a little long-winded.  Which
one do you like?  Which has better style for AWA, and which could earn higher score?  Any comments?  Thanks!



VERSION 1

=========

The author argues that department store sales will increase
significantly over the next ten years because, middle-aged consumers
spend a higher percentage of their retail expenditure than younger
consumers (39% versus 25%),  and the number of middle-aged people
will increase dramatically over the next decade.  The author
additionally argues that stores should take advantage of this trend by
carrying more products aimed at middle-aged customers.  This
argument has several serious flaws.



  First, the argument assumes that a higher percentage of retail
expenditure equals to a bigger amount of retail dollars spent.
However, without knowing the average size of the retail expenditures
for both middle-aged consumers and younger consumers, this assumption
is questionable.



  Second, the argument assumes that other age groups will remain
relatively constant over the next decade, so the increase in
middle-aged people will automatically translate into an increase in
sales.  However, there is no information given on the projected
population change of other age groups.  For example, if the
expected increase in the number of middle-aged people is offset by an
equally significant decrease in the number of younger people, there
would be little or no net gain in sales.



  Third, the argument assumes that the spending pattern of each
age groups remain relatively stable over time.  This errs because
it does not acknowledge that the current younger generation consists of
a different population cohort, which may not favor department
stores.  Indeed, this generation may favor stores such as GAP,
which became prominent in the 1980's.  Thus, the younger
generation's preference for non-department store retailers may be a
generational phenomenon rather than an age-related issue.  And as
the current younger generation comes out of age, the spending pattern
of the age groups may shift as well.



  The argument's suggestion that department store's inventories
should be changed to cater to the tastes of middle-aged customers is
also problematic.  The younger population, although preferring
non-department stores, may be growing at a faster rate than the
middle-aged consumers, or has more spending power than the middle-aged
consumers, therefore they may represent a more attractive market
segment.  Without detailed market segment analysis, the author's
suggestion may not results in better overall sales for the department
store.  



  In sum, this argument is not strong as it currently
stands.  The author needs to provide more information and more
analysis about the spending power, the growth rate and the tastes of
the different age groups, both the middle-aged and the younger ones, to
make the argument more convincing.



VERSION 2

=========

The author's argument that based on certain demographic trend and
current shopping patterns of different age groups, department store
retail sales will increase significantly within the next decade and
stores should replace some of the products targeting your consumers
with those targeting middle-aged consumers is not convincing, because
it suffers from the following flaws.



  First, the author assumes that on average middle-aged consumers
spend more at department stores than younger consumers do, because
middle-aged consumers spend 39% of their retail expenditure at
department stores, comparing to younger consumers' 25%.  But this
assumption is not necessarily true.  Since all we know is the
average percentage of retail expenditure spent at department stores, we
don't know how big the actual retail expenditures are for middle-aged
and younger consumers, it could be the case that younger consumers have
a much bigger retail expenditure, thus although they spend a smaller
percentage at department stores, they actually spend more dollars per
person there.  If so, the whole argument is thrown into question.



  Second, even assuming that current middle-aged consumers spend
more dollars per person than younger consumers, we don't know whether
this pattern could still hold true during the next decade.  Since
the current younger people grow up in the retail environment of the
discount stores such as Wal-Mart, specialty stores like Gaps, and
online stores such as Amazon, when they age and enter the middle-aged
category, their shopping preference could very well differ from that of
today's middle-aged consumers.  So, it's hard to predict with
certainty the shopping patterns of future consumers.



  Third, even granting that the future middle-aged consumers will
indeed continue to spend more at department stores, it's still
uncertain that department stores will see significant sales increase
simply because the number of middle-aged people will increase
dramatically over the next decade.  For instance, the number of
people in other age groups could decrease even more dramatically,
offset any sales gains from the middle-aged group, thus flat or even
drag down the overall department store retail sales.



  Finally, the author's suggestion that department stores replace
goods targeting younger consumers with goods targeting middle-aged
consumers is also questionable, even assuming that future middle-aged
consumers will indeed spend more than younger consumers at department
stores.  It could be that because younger consumers are more
likely to buy fashionable items, sales to them carry a much bigger
profit margin and are more profitable.  Or the number of younger
consumers could also increase dramatically thus making the younger
consumers a market segment the stores can not afford to
under-serve.  Without a detailed market segment analysis
considering or ruling out all these possibilities, the author's
suggestion is dubious at best.



  In the final analysis, because of the above flaws, the argument
is not a convincing one.  To strength the argument, the author
would have to provide evidence that middle-aged consumers indeed spend
more dollars per person than younger consumers at department stores,
the current spending patterns will continue to the next decade,
demographic trends in other non-middle-aged groups will not offset the
increased sales to middle-aged people, and thorough market segment
analysis supports the suggestion to targeting more towards middle-aged
consumers than younger ones.

robertchu

多谢pumpkin 鼓励！

仔细考虑之后，我决定用简练，深刻分析的方法来写AA。 不拼凑字数，而是以理服人。写350字左右就好了，因为文章是写给人看的，而不是写给电脑评分程序看的。

不知大家觉得如何？

whipwan

可是电脑是先看的

如果你写的又多又对

它不给你6分就有问题了

robertchu

如果能行云流水下笔千言，固然好。
可是，30分钟时间，如果硬要写400，500， 甚至600字，一定几乎没有时间整理思路，写出来的文章就可能会“下笔千言，不知所云”。
在我看来，能以字数取悦E-Rater固然好，但最终文章还是给人看的。不仅会有一个ETS的人阅卷（他当时是不知道E-Rater给的分数的），在第一个人和E-Rater分数差异大的时候会有第二个阅卷人给出最终分数，而且有的Top B-school有时会看AWA来决定在几个applicants中取一个。所以，思路，结构，论证比字数更重要。

欢迎探讨！

whipwan

30分钟时能写到500字的

前提是对题目的熟悉

能够一看到题就迅速反应出文章结构

而且打字要又快又好

要拿到高分，一方面要注重满足电脑评分的要求

另一方面也要注意提高论证的水平