phenix写作小组组员2号第三次A作业

wu-intrepidUID: 2659758

TOPIC: ARGUMENT4 - The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.

"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty and Fitch Realty-Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams."


To advice people to choose Adams, the author offers a well-presented but not reasonable and logical argument. Although the number of agents and the revenue should be taken into account when we evaluate a firm, deeper examination of these factors will lead to opposite conclusion. Also, the arguer's own experience is dubious as a premise of this argument.

To begin with, this argument seems based on the inference that more people and working full time means better firm. However, the author obviously do not understand the complicated problems involved in this issue. Because compared with the number of people, the quality is more significant. It is possible that agents in Fitch Realty are all experienced and skilled, and they therefore just need work part- time to handle everything, while most agents in Adams are new to this sale trades, and their full time working may still not enough. This can explain that why Adams need more people, for most agents in there cannot work alone. That is to say, if I choose Fitch Realty, I just need pay one agent, who also possibly work part-time. Yet when I use Adams, I should pay two or more than two full-time working agents. In this case, Fitch Realty is absolutely our first choice.

Further, it is not fair to claim that Adams are better from the its higher revenue, for lots of factors such as different programs, profits can affect the incomes. To evaluate two firms more carefully, we should consider whether they deal with the same kind of home. If Adams sell villas, for example, while Fitch Realty sell normal house, whose price is dramatically lower than villas, their revenue is surely different. Given that the average price Fitch Realty sold is just low 24000 dollars than Adams's, Fitch Realty is more good at in selling. Also,
agents in Fitch Realty is fewer, especially many of them work only part-time, the firm's cost is obviously lower. Thus, more profits Fitch Realty can earn. Yet, Adams, though with higher income, failed to compete with Fitch Realty.

Moreover, the arguer's own experience is not compelling for this argument. Many things will change within ten years, so whether past experience can be applied in this day is always open to question. For instance, this town suffered from economic crisis ten years ago, and people cannot afford a house. In this case, selling home is very difficult. Therefore, taking four mouths to sell it is undeniably excellent for Fitch Realty. Since the arguer do not mention that how long Adams took to sell homes ten years ago, we cannot tell which one is better. Again, different location always means different demands. Suppose the home sold by Fitch is far from city, few people would consider it. While the home sold by Adams last year, if it is located in the central town, would attract many people’s attention. For that matter, the arguer’s comparison is meaningless. Unless two firms sell the homes located in the same place in the approximately same time, we can tell which one performs well.

To sum up, since the author neglects so many factors and compare these two firms unfairly, this argument is not acceptable. Nevertheless, all the possibilities and the method of judging two firms mentioned above will help the arguer to draw a better inference.