argument117（机经） 从审题到完成用了45分钟真失败，（请留连接必回拍）

lunaticUID: 150745

117The 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-----------------------------
The argument about increasing stock of office supplies based on a recent survey that reporting a
work-at-home trend seems at first glance reasonable in some sense. However, how many people take part in the survey at earth? Do the workers select the supplies in Valu-Mart? The conclusion that increasing stock of home office machines will make its office-supply department more profitable may mask other (and potentially more significant) causes of impressive sales in its office-supply departments.

First of all, the arguer fails to provide the information about the scope of the survey and the amount of the respondents. If the scope is very narrow and the amount is very small, the 70 percent is also meaningless, in that maybe only several companies required their staff to take more work home from the workplace; and if the these kinds of work have no need in office machines but only a notebook PC, for example the workers in software company. Therefore, with no consideration of the specific information about the survey such as the scope of the survey or the amount as well as the occupation of the respondents, we have every reason to doubt the reliability of the survey, of course, the conclusion about stock also.

In addition, the arguer fails to analyze the specific causes of their impressive sales. Even if there indeed exist many workers required to take work home from the workplace, which is, of course, unwarranted, it does not follow that these workers will in favor of the supplies in Valu-Mart. However, as cited in the argument Valu-Mart encounter impressive sales possibly due to their high prices or poor services, and if there no improvement in there respects, the most profitable component cannot be expected. Accordingly, the recommendation without consideration of these factors is unconvincing.

Finally, the argument above is weakened by the fact that it does take into account the cost of storing. As we know, the fees of storing is usually very high, if the stock of home office machines cannot be sold out in short time, the high profits cannot be assured again.

The argument for stock of home office machines should provide more information about the specific circumstance about the survey and relation between increased work-at-home workers and selling more home office machines. After all, a misleading policy of a company may lead to a decline of profits even a loss of business.

yiyi2005UID: 192894

The argument about increasing stock of office supplies based on a recent survey that reporting a
work-at-home trend seems at first glance reasonable in some sense. However, how many people take part in the survey at earthon earth? Do the workers select the supplies in Valu-Mart? The conclusion that increasing stock of home office machines will make its office-supply department more profitable may mask other (and potentially more significant) causes of impressive sales in its office-supply departments.

First of all, the arguer fails to provide the information about the scope of the survey and the amount of the respondents. If the scope is very narrow and the amount is very smalllow, the 70 percent is also meaningless, in thatcase maybe only several companies required their staff to take more work home from the workplace; and if the thesedelet the kinds of work have no need in office machines but only a notebook PC, for example the workers in software company. Therefore, with no consideration of the specific information about the survey such as the scope of the survey or the amount as well as the occupation of the respondents, we have every reason to doubt the reliability of the survey, of course, the conclusion about stock also.

In addition, the arguer fails to analyze the specific causes of their impressive sales. Even if there indeed exist many workers required to take work home from the workplace, which is, of course, unwarranted, it does not follow that these workers will in favor of the supplies in Valu-Mart. However, as cited in the argument Valu-Mart encounter impressive sales possibly due to their high prices or poor services, and if thereare no improvement in therethese respects, the most profitable component cannot be expected. Accordingly, the recommendation without consideration of these factors is unconvincing.

Finally, the argument above is weakened by the fact that it does take into account the cost of storing. As we know, the fees of storing is usually very high, if the stock of home office machines cannot be sold out in short time, the high profits cannot be assured again.

[to strengthen argument,不然后面的after all好象差了些什么]The argument[author] for stock of home office machines should provide more information about the specific circumstance about the survey and relation between increased work-at-home workers and selling more home office machines. After all, a misleading policy of a company may lead to a decline of profits even a loss of business.

[谢谢你上次帮我改文章]我还记着呢:)]
加油

lunaticUID: 150745

呵呵，不要客气，共同进步嘛
加油～～～

mythztUID: 162409

The argument about increasing stock of office supplies based on a recent survey that reporting a work-at-home trend seems at first glance reasonable in some sense. However, how many people take part in the survey at earth(on earth)? Do(Will) the workers select the supplies in Valu-Mart? The conclusion that increasing stock of home office machines will make its office-supply department more profitable may mask other (and potentially more significant) causes of impressive sales in its office-supply departments.(开头段的问句挺有力度的，赞一个。不过精炼一点会更出色。)

First of all, the arguer fails to provide the information about the scope of the survey and the amount of the respondents. If the scope is very narrow and the amount is very small, the 70 percent is also(also去掉) meaningless, in that maybe only several companies required their staff to take more work home from the workplace; and if the(the去掉) these kinds of work have no need in office machines but only a notebook PC, for example the workers in software company(companies). Therefore, with no consideration of the specific information about the survey such as the scope of the survey or the amount as well as the occupation of the respondents, we have every reason to doubt the reliability of the survey, of course, the conclusion about stock also.

In addition, the arguer fails to analyze the specific causes of their impressive sales.(原文没说已经产生impressive sales吧?) Even if there indeed exist many workers required to take work home from the workplace, which is, of course, unwarranted, it does not follow that these workers will in favor of the supplies in Valu-Mart. However, as cited in the argument Valu-Mart encounters impressive sales possibly due to their high prices or poor services, and if there (is)no improvement in there(these) respects, the most profitable component cannot be expected. Accordingly, the recommendation without consideration of these factors is unconvincing.
(上一段攻击点好像比较模糊啊，我觉得可以说说工人家可能已经有这些东西，不会再购买；而且作者也没考虑竞争对手)
Finally, the argument above is weakened by the fact that it does take into account the cost of storing. As we know, the fees of storing is usually very high, if the stock of home office machines(if the home office machines stocked) cannot be sold out in short time, the high profits cannot be assured again(为什么是again?).

The argument for stock of home office machines should provide(用argument作provide的主语感觉不是很合适) more information about the specific circumstance (干脆把specific circumstance 换成details，你觉得呢？)about the survey and relation between increased work-at-home workers and selling more home office machines(这句能否再改进一下，感觉蛮绕的). After all, a misleading policy of a company may lead to a decline of profits even a loss of business.
整体感觉不错，加油！