Could you please give me your opinions. Any Suggestions are welcomed :) Thanks!
The market for the luxury-goods industry is on the decline. Recent reports show that a higher unemployment rate, coupled with consumer fears, has decreased the amount of money the average household spends on both essential and nonessential items, but especially on nonessential items. Since luxury goods are, by nature, nonessential, this market will be the first to decrease in the present economic climate, and luxury retailers should refocus their attention to lower-priced markets.
The argument argues that due to the declining stance of the global economy, retailers should be focus more rapt attention regarding the essential items, crucial for all households and abstain from promoting luxury products. This is based on a number of puny assumptions, which weaken and etiolate its effectiveness.
First of all, the conclusion is based on the notion that luxury products are nonessential. This can be completely refuted since it is a matter of personalities. Some couples view a 24-carat diamond ring as a necessity for a perfect wedding. Working mothers may find it difficult to discipline their children if it hadn't been for those chocolate bars, a promising reward for good behavior. Such products may be redeemed life-saving for some and it is practically fatuous and inane to give up on this promising marketing sector.
In addition, the augury of an earlier decline in the luxury goods market versus the essential goods when the economy plummets is based on an amateur prognosis, not on simple hard-core facts. This is not an inevitable consequence for numerous reasons. People, who would still be employed, would most probably want to take advantage of the clearance sales and bargains, created to stimulate purchasing. Imagine a Prada handbag sold at a $100 or a pair of authentic Nike tennis shoes at $200. It would be a good investment and completely worth the money. Even for the unemployed, such opportunities would seem inelutable and may very well sell off some property to partake in this spree!
Furthermore, it is assumed that a rapt attention directed towards the lower-priced markets would actually be effective and would increase revenues. This is not necessarily the case because the attention could be, at some instances, counterproductive. It might lead to fierce competition between various firms, leading to a lose-lose situation, where both are attempting to win over customers by reducing their price tags and evidently turning to chapter eleven to file for bankruptcy.
To strengthen this argument, it would have been sage to report results of a concrete survey regarding the importance of luxury products to the general public. Financial experts could recall previous lapses of the global economy and contrast the probability of a receding market for the non-essential products. Finally, cases of an increased attention, successful of turning back the economy around, should have been highlighted and the measures to be done pointed out.
The market for the luxury-goods industry is on the decline. Recent reports show that a higher unemployment rate, coupled with consumer fears, has decreased the amount of money the average household spends on both essential and nonessential items, but especially on nonessential items. Since luxury goods are, by nature, nonessential, this market will be the first to decrease in the present economic climate, and luxury retailers should refocus their attention to lower-priced markets.
The argument argues that due to the declining stance of the global economy, retailers should be focus more rapt attention regarding the essential items, crucial for all households and abstain from promoting luxury products. This is based on a number of puny assumptions, which weaken and etiolate its effectiveness.
First of all, the conclusion is based on the notion that luxury products are nonessential. This can be completely refuted since it is a matter of personalities. Some couples view a 24-carat diamond ring as a necessity for a perfect wedding. Working mothers may find it difficult to discipline their children if it hadn't been for those chocolate bars, a promising reward for good behavior. Such products may be redeemed life-saving for some and it is practically fatuous and inane to give up on this promising marketing sector.
In addition, the augury of an earlier decline in the luxury goods market versus the essential goods when the economy plummets is based on an amateur prognosis, not on simple hard-core facts. This is not an inevitable consequence for numerous reasons. People, who would still be employed, would most probably want to take advantage of the clearance sales and bargains, created to stimulate purchasing. Imagine a Prada handbag sold at a $100 or a pair of authentic Nike tennis shoes at $200. It would be a good investment and completely worth the money. Even for the unemployed, such opportunities would seem inelutable and may very well sell off some property to partake in this spree!
Furthermore, it is assumed that a rapt attention directed towards the lower-priced markets would actually be effective and would increase revenues. This is not necessarily the case because the attention could be, at some instances, counterproductive. It might lead to fierce competition between various firms, leading to a lose-lose situation, where both are attempting to win over customers by reducing their price tags and evidently turning to chapter eleven to file for bankruptcy.
To strengthen this argument, it would have been sage to report results of a concrete survey regarding the importance of luxury products to the general public. Financial experts could recall previous lapses of the global economy and contrast the probability of a receding market for the non-essential products. Finally, cases of an increased attention, successful of turning back the economy around, should have been highlighted and the measures to be done pointed out.