IN THEIR ADVERTISING, BUSINESS NOWADAYS USUALLY EMPHASIZE THAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE NEW IN SOME WAY

IELTS WRITING TASK 2_NEW PRODUCT

IN THEIR ADVERTISING, BUSINESS NOWADAYS USUALLY EMPHASIZE THAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE NEW IN SOME WAY.

WHY IS THIS? DO YOU THINK IT IS A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE DEVELOPMENT?

There has been a common assumption that more firms, investors and companies are trying to kickstart their brand new products into the market and make their labels have something distinctive from others. This phenomenon is attributable to many explanations. From a personal perspective, I firmly believe that this could lead to an adverse repercussion.

There are two underlying reasons why businesses are heading into confirming the uniqueness of their items. First and foremost, companies need to have an intrigued commodity to compete with others. As we know, there are thousands of new industries engaging in almost every aspects on a regular basis. If your private company wants to be successful, it needs to have something different. Another driving factor that results in the demand of consumer. Given the proliferation of technology and supplied resources, people inadvertently ask for higher convenience and wider options to choose. For example, when we are able to drive a normal bike, we urge to have a better one to fix the recent mistakes of the previous item.

I would content that the increase in making new goods may bring society some detrimental effect. To begin with, there is a host of stuffs that we will never use up in the future which is turned into waste requiring a huge amount of money to process. Additionally, some businesses try to create useless suppliers, thinking that it may help to improve the profit which occasionally go to the opposite site. Apparently, some new products are not guaranteed by any professional institutions that may do harm to the users. In fact, spending time on choosing different items bringing the same value considered to be time consuming.

In short, competitive market and customer's demands are to blame for the emphasizing the exotic materials of businesses. I am convinced that this problem has a number of negative implications for the whole community in long-term scale.

There is a difference between the original topic and the topic restatement. The original topic highlights how companies call attention to product improvements. The writer thought this referred to "distinction " from other brands. The original topic did not involve competitor products. That means an incorrect reference was made in the restated topic. The discussion reference was unintentionally changed by the writer. The paragraph also fails to provide a solid reasoning topic to the first question.

The writer also offers a redundant response to the second question. Adverse and repercussion both mean a negative result. One of the two descriptive words should have been chosen for use followed by the word "progression", an alternative to the word "development". The error in word usage in this and other sections will definitely reflect in an LR deduction.

Both paragraphs have plausible reasons presented in relation to the original prompt. The weiter managed to get the discussion back on track for the most part. There is still the problem of the inclusion of competitors in the discussion when there should not be any.

The relevant reasons do not represent well thought out and developed examples and explanations. There and too many reasons presented when a single reason would have sufficed.

The scores are based on the way reasons are fully developed as an explanation. When too many reasons are presented, without proper validation, then the paragraph is under developed in terms of scoring considerations. The C + C score will definitely suffer in the end.

The writer should improve on the points discussed here to improve his scoring chances.