- 最后登录
- 2021-10-22
- 在线时间
- 113 小时
- 寄托币
- 225
- 声望
- 15
- 注册时间
- 2005-4-13
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 8
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 135
- UID
- 205632
- 声望
- 15
- 寄托币
- 225
- 注册时间
- 2005-4-13
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 8
|
Argument117 第3篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧!
------摘要------
作者:寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间:32分15秒 640 words
从2005年7月9日14时11分到2005年7月9日14时32分
------题目------
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.
'Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores.'
------正文------
In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart (V-M) stores concludes that office-supply departments of V-M stores could increase their profits by expanding their stock of home office machines and office supplies. To support this claim the manager cites a recent survey showing the work-at-home trend, and points out that the office-supply departments haven't had impressive sales in the past. However, the argument relies on series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.
First of all, the manager provides no evidence that that the survey's respondents are representative of the overall group of working people. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that people inclined to complain the busyness of their work were more willing to respond to the survey than other people were. Besides, we are not informed the occupation, age and sex of the respondents, then the results might distort the truth. In either event, the survey results would be unreliable for the purpose of drawing any conclusion about the work-at-home trend, let alone that the office-supply departments of V-M stores would be profitable.
Secondly, even if a majority of people are required to take more work home with them than before, the argument unfairly assumes a sufficient demand for home office machines and office supplies. Perhaps the vast majority of these homes have had adequate office supplies, or these people take along portable machines with them from the workplace while they work at home. For that matter, perhaps these people have completed those tasks using office machines and taken home those tasks without using many office machines. Thus, lacking evidence that home office machines and office supplies would become a sufficient demand the argument's conclusion the office-supply departments of V-M stores would be benefited that is unjustified.
Moreover, even if current demand would otherwise support an increase in the availability of home office machines and office supplies, the office-supply departments of V-M stores would not necessarily be profitable as a result by increasing their stock of home office machines and office supplies. Profitability is a function of both revenue and expense. Thus, it is entirely possible that the stores' costs of obtaining superfluous home office machines and office supplies might render it unprofitable despite their popularity. Without weighing revenue against expenses the argument's conclusion is premature at best. Besides, other such factors which might include quality, price and species of the merchandise, competitor and other aspects could affect the sales volume of home office machines and office supplies. Without ruling out these possible scenarios, the manager cannot convince me that the recommendation would help ensure the profitable of V-m stores.
Finally, even if the office-supply departments of V-M stores enhance profits, the manager assumes further that their office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of their stores. Yet the memo contains no evidence to support this assumption. Perhaps office-supply departments account for a small proportion of all components in V-M stores; or perhaps other components of V-M stores are also struggled to be more profitable. Any of the scenarios, if true, would cast considerable doubt on the argument's conclusion that the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of V-M stores.
In sum, the manager cannot justify his or her conclusion on the basis of the scant evidence provided in the memo. To convince me that increasing the stock of home office machines and office supplies would be profitable office-supply departments of V-M stores would need to provide better reliable evidence that the extent of this survey and information about the respondent, and that a demand for home office machines and office supplies is more abundant than before. To better assess the argument it would be useful to know what sorts of office supplies is more popular by those work-at-home people, and what proportion the office-supply departments of V-M stores account for.
[ Last edited by 沙迦 on 2005-8-9 at 17:21 ] |
|