新题库第60题，求拍

inapUID: 3033165

60. The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice for a
client.

"Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold,
have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that
region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, and climate
forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years.
Furthermore, many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent
population growth. Because of these trends, we predict an increased demand for
heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose
major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of
the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions
and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove
unwarranted.


Abnormal cold winter last year and prediction from forecasters together ensure abnormal cold winters in the following years. Cold winters and more residents would boost demand for heating oil in the coming few years, which means investment in oil retailer, i.e. consolidated industries, would be profitable and thus desirable. Sounds plausible, isn't it? Well, this logic link provided by the author is not that reliable if we exam it more closely.

First of all, cold winter in one year does not indicate cold winter in the following years. We can easily provide weather records to confirm this point. Besides, long range weather forecasts are generally not reliable, so even if forecasters did predict that trend, which I doubt the authenticity of this citation, that does not count anything. To demonstrate that the colder trend is probably to be true, the author should provide more rigorous evidence from academia. If he/she fails to do so, he/she should not use it to support the increased demand for heating oil.

Even if the weather prediction turns out to be true, plus more residents, both do not mean increased demand for oil in the few years. Below-normal temperature probably would lead to greater need for heating energy, but the assertion that demand for oil would also increased in the next few years needs justification. As major fuel for heating, demand for oil probably would surge in the short run, but in the long run, people may substitute other heating energy such as gas or electricity for heating oil. If the substitution is easy and requires little cost, we can well predict that the increased demand for heating oil would not last long.

What's most important, greater demand for oil does not mean greater profit for the investment in consolidated industries. Ceteris paribus (with other factors or things remaining the same), increased demand leads to higher retail price and greater revenue. Unless consolidated industries can keep their cost in a suitable level, which is simply assumed by the author, greater revenue does not lead to greater profit. While the purchasing price from oil producer, which is essential to total cost, is hardly controlled by the retailers, i.e. consolidated industries. Without information about the distribution of bargain power in negotiating purchasing oil price, We can not make any reliable predictions about the trend of oil purchasing price, not to mention the total cost. Besides, to prove that the investment is desirable, not only should it be profitable, but also the profit from the investment should be higher than other alternatives’, at least the riskless deposit interest.

BasiliskUID: 2617854

提示说了examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions。我觉得你可以主题句紧扣assumption，至少达到形式上的扣题。6分范文这么做了。你的思路似乎还是旧G的，现在要看提示。你还可以攻击有多少forecastor这么预测的问题，展开还可以再充分些。

Even if段。注意题中说了traditionally used oil，攻击时要扣住这个，所以新房子不一定用油。另外below-normal是below多少，一定需要暖气吗。

最后你提到了return问题，technically，严格来讲应该说有两个因素，（1）return是否补偿风险，这个我不会攻击，因为市场的定价基本都是正确的。（2）油市看好这个消息是否已经被包括进了现在的股价，如果人们比你先反应价格已经调整到位，你追涨也没用。