ARGUMENT117 同主题写作 限时修改版 火热互拍中

MIMOSARLUID: 2112846

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."

Starting from a survey that more respondents have increased home work, the manager assumes that there will be an increase needs for office-supply. Then author   recommends that all their stores should increase the office-supply and the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of their stores. The argument is well-presented, but further reflection reveals that it suffers from several logic flaws.

To begin with, the manager rests his assumption on an insufficient survey. In this survey, the author does not provide us the location, the sample number, who responded to the survey and so on. If only ten persons answered this survey in an office before their boss, then it is suspicious for us to believe that all stores need to increase to increase their stock of office-supply and can earn profits.

Moreover, the manager rests on the assumption that the increased home work will automatically lead to the increase of office-supply. However, there is no evidence stated in the argument to support this assumption. It is entirely impossible that those respondents already have had office-supply in their home. Or they did not use to any office-supply in home because they only took their laptop back to home and deal with those work. Then there is no reason for them to use small copy machines, paper shredders, fax machines and so on.

Even if the need of office-supply increased, there is no guarantee that the office-supply department will become the most profitable components of their stores. There are other factors affecting the profits. How much will they pay for to increase the stock of those office supplies? Do they have enough money to increase those supplies? If they have not enough money to pay for those increased stocks, then the plan cannot be run. How long will be the increase need of office-supply? If the need only can exist in several weeks, then all the cost for increase for stock will be lead to the loss of profits. Did all those stores need to increase their stocks? Maybe in some rural areas most of persons need not use any office-supply because there are no any office in their places. Therefore, his argument is dubious without ruling out such possibility. Furthermore, if only the department of office-supply increase its profits, while other departments lost their customs because too much focus paid on office supplies, it is not a good strategy for Valu-Mart stores.

In conclusion, the manager given merely scratches the surface of increasing profits form office-supply, much more work is needed by investigating the potential needs of those supplies all of their stores. Furthermore, it could be further improved by providing effectiveness of this plan.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-6 at 22:44 ]

ouymUID: 2109118

Starting from a survey that more respondents have increased home work, the manager assumes that there will be an increase needs for office-supply. Then author   recommends that all their stores should increase the office-supply and the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of their stores. The argument is well-presented, but further reflection reveals that it suffers from several logic flaws.

To begin with, the manager rests his assumption on an insufficient survey. In this survey, the author does not provide us the location, the sample number, who responded to the survey and so on. If only ten persons answered this survey（我漏了这一点） in an office before their boss（这有什么用呢？大概你是想说在boss填调查表不能真实地表达情况，可是你应该说清楚！不能让读者猜！）, then it is suspicious for us to believe that all stores need to increase to increase（多了一个吧！） their stock of office-supply and can earn profits.

Moreover, the manager（能说the manager rests on...吗？我只知道the recommendation rests on...是肯定对的） rests on the assumption that the increased home work will automatically lead to the increase of office-supply（这句不通！楼主读一下就知道了）. However, there is no evidence stated in the argument to support this assumption. It is entirely impossible that those respondents already have had office-supply（看来楼主对office-supply这个词有误解，建议再仔细看看题目！） in their home. Or they did（为什么要用过去时？） not use to any office-supply in home because they only took their laptop back to home and deal with those work. Then there is no reason for them to use small copy machines, paper shredders, fax machines and so on.（我敢肯定楼主没有正确理解“office-supply”这个词，这个词从题目的“office-supply departments”中可以看出，它是“提供（卖）办公用品的”的意思！下文仍然存在这个问题，不再重述了！ ）
Even if the need of office-supply increased, there is no guarantee that the office-supply department will become the most profitable components of their stores（这句话在于驳斥“在这个公司的众多部门中office-supply department成为利润最高的部门”，这没什么问题，可是后面的几句话文不对题！）. There are other factors affecting the profits. How much will they pay for to increase the stock of those office supplies? Do they have enough money to increase those supplies? If they have not enough money to pay for those increased stocks, then the plan cannot be run（前面这几个问句根你想驳斥的观点有关系吗？）. How long will be the increase need of office-supply（这是一个病句！应该是：how long will *** maintains,其实你下面的那句话就意识到了这个错误！）? If the need only can exist in several weeks, then all the cost for increase for stock will be lead to the loss of profits. Did all those stores need to increase their stocks? Maybe in some rural areas most of persons need not use any office-supply because there are no any office in their places. Therefore, his argument（如何知道一定是his，还是用this吧） is dubious without ruling out such possibility. Furthermore, if only the department of office-supply increase its profits, while other departments lost their customs because too much focus paid on office supplies, it is not a good strategy for Valu-Mart stores（这不是这篇argument应该讨论的，离题）.
In conclusion, the manager given（gave） merely scratches the surface of increasing profits form office-supply, much more work is needed by investigating the potential needs of those supplies all of their stores（不懂！）. Furthermore, it could be further improved by providing effectiveness of this plan（but what plan?）.