Call Support +91-85588-96644
TCYonline

Login

Sign Up

Please enter a Username or Email ID
Please enter a password
Keep me logged in
Please enter your name
Please enter your mobile number
You can't leave Captcha Code empty
By submitting this form, you agree to the Terms & Privacy Policy.
OR

Sign Up via Facebook

Sign Up via Google

Sign Up via Twitter

Download Software
Tests given

Download TCY App

App Image
Posted on Apr 14, 2015 5:50 PM

Q99
The development office at Platonic University has provided a suggestion to evaluate ways of improving the revenue for overcoming there expenses. They further build up by addressing one potential solution by following what one of the universities has done. Greene University has been able to increase their revenues by accepting $100 million sum of donation by renaming themselves after the donor and the development office proposes a similar activity as a way to increase the quantity of donation.
The argument sounds plausible but there are some logical flaws. Firstly, the argument is silent about the location of Greene University and the circumstances at which they were able to receive their donation. Secondly, the renaming of a university may result loss in the market value of the brand name and the recognition of the university. Thirdly, advertising to a homogeneous group of people may not result in increasing the amount of donations.
The first flaw creates a false analogy. That is, the method adopted by Greene University may not work for Platonic University as the argument is silent on certain external factors. Greene University may be located where large majority could be of wealthy people who can afford such a donation. Methodology for the advertisement for donation could have played much important role. People could have reacted differently knowing the actual usage of the donation.
The second flaw is the assumption that renaming of the university is the only way of receiving or increasing donations and the after effects. Extrinsic factors could have their toll. People may not be able to recognize the achievements of the university and may result in reducing the amount of enrollments for the future. A brand works on its created market identity. Renaming may change the university image and popularity and students might not want to enroll for a university who are not well recognized.
Thirdly, by advertising to wealthy people only may not increase the number of donations. Revenue may not be affected much by the number of donations but could be by the sum of donation. The nature of the people gets them to donate rather than the wealth they attain. University could achieve more if they address to a heterogeneous group of people than one category.
Thus, the argument is not logically convincing. The evidence provided to support the conclusion failed to address the above mentioned flaws. The argument could have been strengthened and made more reliable. The development office could access the expenses incurred to generate revenue and create more elaborate proposal.

Reply


Please type your answer before submitting.
Submit

Very good effort Sabinder. There are just one or two spelling errors, which can be ignored. Rest is absolutely fine. Elaborate on your points that's it.