argument117【clover】第三次小组作业 by a08805436

a08805436UID: 2725634

这是我较为满意的一篇Argu 欢迎牛人指点思路

TOPIC: ARGUMENT117 - 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."
WORDS: 534
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/2/5 11:10:01

In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart stores recommends that in order to increase the profit of their stores, they should increase at all stores the home office machines and stock of home office supplies. At first sight, this argument seems to be justifiable, but close scrutiny reveals that these evidences the manager provides neither constitute a logical statement nor provide compelling support making this argument sound and invulnerable.

First and foremost, the manager cites a survey that 70 percent of the respondents reported that they are required to take more work home from workplace. Yet we do not know the exact number of the surveyors and whether the survey did randomly across the entire group. Maybe the numbers of the surveyors are not sufficient enough to gauge the whole trend or the survey is done in some remote areas that it does not ensure representativeness.

Moreover, even assuming that the object and the extent of the survey are methodological and systematical, the manager points out further that due to the work-at-home trend, the workers would buy the products in the Valu-Mart stores. Yet the memo contains no evidence to substantiate this. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible there are some other stores selling the same products at a lower price than that of Valu-Mart and the consumers are more willing to spend their money in those stores. It is also possible that most of Valu-Mart stores locate in rural areas and most of their consumers are farmers who do not need office products.

Furthermore, even we assumes that the survey is done in a proper way and there are a lot of people would like to buy the products if the stores increase their stock of office products, this the manager recommends further that they should increase the office machines as well as the stock of office supplies. Common sense tells us that workers would not probably buy big office machines at home. Even if they do buy the machines in the Valu-Mart stores, the number of deals would be low, because unlike the office supplies, people would not patronize their stores for a second time if they had bought one of the machines.

Finally, even we assumes that the work-at-home trend is credible and there are a lot of people who would like to buy the office products sold at Valu-Mart stores, the manager’s conclusion that this kind of measure would increase the profit is unwarranted. Profit is a factor of not only revenue, but also the costs. It is entirely possible that the cost of producing the office products or other costs associated with the products will offset, even outweigh the revenue. Besides, a myriad of other possible occurrence, such as unfavorable economic conditions, might prevent the stores as profitable in the foreseeable future as the argument predicts.

To sum up, the argument has several flaws that render it unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster the argument, I need to know the object and the extent of the survey as well as the location and sales conditions of the Valu-Mart. I would also need to know more concrete and clear evidence to show the possibility of earning more profits.

misirUID: 2684938

In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart stores recommends that in order to increase the profit of their stores, they should increase at all stores the home office machines and stock of home office supplies. At first sight, this argument seems to be justifiable, but close scrutiny reveals that these evidences the manager provides neither constitute a logical statement nor provide compelling support making this argument sound and invulnerable.

First and foremost, the manager cites a survey that 70 percent of the respondents reported that they are required to take more work home from workplace. Yet we do not know the exact number of the surveyors and whether the survey did randomly across the entire group. Maybe the numbers of the surveyors are not sufficient enough to gauge the whole trend or the survey is done in some remote areas that it does not ensure representativeness.

Moreover, even assuming that the object and the extent of the survey are methodological and systematical, the manager points out further that due to the work-at-home trend, the workers would buy the products in the Valu-Mart stores. Yet the memo contains no evidence to substantiate this. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible there are some other stores selling the same products at a lower price than that of Valu-Mart and the consumers are more willing to spend their money in those stores. It is also possible that most of Valu-Mart stores locate in rural areas and most of their consumers are farmers who do not need office products.

Furthermore, even we assumes that the survey is done in a proper way and there are a lot of people[前面有are了，这里是否应该加个who] would like to buy the products if the stores increase their stock of office products, this[?] the manager recommends further that they should increase the office machines as well as the stock of office supplies. Common sense tells us that workers would not probably buy big office machines at home. Even if they do buy the machines in the Valu-Mart stores, the number of deals would be low, because unlike the office supplies, people would not patronize their stores for a second time if they had bought one of the machines.[啊，虚拟语气，要学习学习。。。]

Finally, even we assumes that the work-at-home trend is credible and there are a lot of people who would like to buy the office products sold at Valu-Mart stores, the manager’s conclusion that this kind of measure would increase the profit is unwarranted. Profit is a factor of not only revenue, but also the costs. It is entirely possible that the cost of producing the office products or other costs associated with the products will offset, even outweigh[我觉得用exceed比较好] the revenue. Besides, a myriad of other possible occurrence, such as unfavorable economic conditions, might prevent the stores as profitable in the foreseeable future as the argument predicts.

To sum up, the argument has several flaws that render it unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster the argument, I need to know the object and the extent of the survey as well as the location and sales conditions of the Valu-Mart. I would also need to know more concrete and clear evidence to show the possibility of earning more profits.
真是佩服你A有这么多好写的说。。。
运用模板很流畅。。。用词很多是红宝上的，太恐怖了！！

JulymayUID: 2645085

In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart stores recommends that in order to increase the profit of their stores, they should increase at all stores the home office machines and stock of home office supplies. At first sight, this argument seems to be justifiable, but close scrutiny reveals that these evidences the manager provides neither constitute a logical statement nor provide compelling support making this argument sound and invulnerable.（开头简洁明了，没什么说的~）

First and foremost, the manager cites a survey that 70 percent of the respondents reported that they are required to take more work home from workplace.
（听过66的讲课以后我觉得还是不要直接重复文中的话，比较好，虽然我也一直在重复）Yet we do not know the exact number of the surveyors and whether the survey did randomly across the entire group. Maybe the numbers of the surveyors are not sufficient enough to gauge the whole trend or the survey is done in some remote areas that it does not ensure representativeness.（希望在最后下一个结论，驳斥作者的逻辑）

Moreover, even assuming that the object and the extent of the survey are methodological and systematical, the manager points out further that due to the work-at-home trend, the workers would buy the products in the Valu-Mart stores. Yet
（我觉得这个连词换成然而可能更加恰当）the memo contains no evidence to substantiate this. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible there are some other stores selling the same products at a lower price
（这个攻击点很棒~赞一下）than that of Valu-Mart and the consumers are more willing to spend their money in those stores. It is also possible that most of Valu-Mart stores locate in rural areas and most of their consumers are farmers who do not need office products.
Furthermore（赞一下连接词的运用）, even we assumes that the survey is done in a proper way and there are a lot of people would like to buy the products if the stores increase their stock of office products, this the manager recommends further that they should increase the office machines as well as the stock of office supplies. Common sense tells us that workers would not probably buy big office machines at home. Even if they do buy the machines in the Valu-Mart stores, the number of deals would be low, because unlike the office supplies, people would not patronize their stores for a second time if they had bought one of the machines.
Finally, even we assumes
（层层让步的攻击~很棒~）that the work-at-home trend is credible and there are a lot of people who would like to buy the office products sold at Valu-Mart stores, the manager’s conclusion that this kind of measure would increase the profit is unwarranted. Profit is a factor of not only revenue, but also the costs. It is entirely possible that the cost of producing the office products or other costs associated with the products will offset, even outweigh the revenue. Besides, a myriad of other possible occurrence, such as unfavorable economic conditions, might prevent the stores as profitable in the foreseeable future as the argument predicts.
To sum up, the argument has several flaws that render it unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster the argument, I need to know the object and the extent of the survey as well as the location and sales conditions of the Valu-Mart. I would also need to know more concrete and clear evidence to show the possibility of earning more profits.