In the GRE argument task, candidates need to study the topic and find out the flaws, assumptions, and weak statements. In GRE argument task - Food Warehouse, the argument focuses on how the Vice President of a food distribution company has stated about their damage caused by pests. The candidates need to find out the flaws in the statement and write an essay within 30 minutes. They will have similar topics to practice from GRE writing practice papers.

Topic:

The following statement has appeared in a memo from a food distribution company said by the Vice President about food storage warehouses in a lot of cities.

“Recently we signed a contract with The Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff Company for all our pest control services.”

Answer:

The food- distribution company, as mentioned earlier, is linked with food storage warehouses in various cities. Lately, it signed a contract for the pest control services with Fly- away – pest- control company, leading to demolishing the contract with Buzzoff Pest-Control company in a number of cities once a year. The food distribution company’s memo from the vice president lays stress on returning to Buzzoff Pest-control company for its better services in the cities. This is established on the differentiation between the losses incurred by the two pest control companies in the connection with food destroyed by pest damage. At first sight, this claim within the memo appears to be quite logical because the services of the company which is inflicting additional financial loss should be right away terminated.

Also check:

However, the rising competition with the close markets might not entirely support the organic worth of the food accessible there. There appears to be no proof in support of the above-mentioned statement. It is quite likely that these food products are admired due to their higher quality or better taste. There is a decent possibility of a better advertisement for these newly launched organic food products. The memorandum has not thought of the role of the media in giving publicity to the organic content of those products. Correspondingly the requirement of the hour could also be met by higher advertisements through numerous media channels. The company had over $20,000 of food destroyed last month. The initial statement in the memo states that they “recently” switched pest control providers. Whereas this conveys a general time period, it does not show the direct relationship to the damages incurred. Maybe, Fly-Away Pest Control Company could have been taken on board two weeks ago. During this case, the fault of the damages would fall onto the previous Pest Control Company (in this case Buzzoff). We tend to merely recognize the precise time period within which the damages occurred.

Damage of food value $20,000 by the Fly-Away- Pest- Control company in Palm City can be due to bad weather conditions. The climatic conditions in both Palm City and Wintervale should be compared. Additional harm in Palm City might have resulted in the lack of adequate facilities or a congenial environment provided by the food distribution company. One cannot even rule out the probability of less structured or inexperienced employees utilized by the food distribution company itself. Consequently, the choice on continuation or termination of the contract with Fly-Away Pest Control Company ought to support its performance in all the associated cities and not simply one city.

Lastly, however, there should have been some factors responsible for transferring the contract from Buzzoff Pest-Control Company to Fly-Away Pest-Control Company once the services of the previous year were received for several years. Those factors should have had a ground and thus must not be neglected. For example, the price shared by each of the pest control services should be analyzed thoroughly. Since the Fly-Away-Pest-Control company charges a lot less compared to Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, separate records of the reasonable expenditure by each of the companies ought to be evaluated side by side. This may provide a true image of the additional profitable company, in the long run.

Continuing otherwise might damage the name of the food distribution company, as they switch from one company to a different and back to the previous one looks to be an impulsive, immature and unethical action. Thus the argument given within the memoranda proves to be quite unconvincing, attributable to the assorted above-mentioned aspects being neglected. The Vice President presumes that Fly-Away Pest Control Company is to be held responsible for the damages that occurred but does not present a factual argument to embolden this point. The evidence about the two companies’ operations is also needed for further evaluation.