Argument117 ［加州阳光］第四次作业 sandy

sandyfriendUID: 157486

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: 445          TIME: 0:55:03          DATE: 2006-6-21

In this argument the arguer claims that the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores. To support his conclusion the arguer use the evidence that over 70 percent of the respondents in the survey are required to take more work home than before. In addition, the arguer reason that we should increase the stock of the home office machines and supplies to take advantage of such condition.  A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

To begin with, this argument can not provide the exact and detailed information of the survey. The arguer says nothing of the exact number of people taking part in the survey and the number of the respondents. As we know, small size sample survey would not delegate most people' claims. If only 20 percent people take part in the survey and even more less respond, we can not use the survey to support the views. So, more information is needed for proving the survey is available.

Admittedly, if we accept the validity of the survey, we should no attribute the unimpressive sales to no making use of the trend.   Many other things may affect the sale of the office-supply department, such as the locations, the services and even the management. Let's the locations as a example. If the Valu-Mart stores locate in or near the living communities, people come back home for work may buy some office supplies for convenience. On the other hand, if located in industrial ones, the Valu-mart store certainly has not seen impressive sales. The arguer should make clear that taking advantage of the home working trend is not suitable to any condition.

Even if the two question mention above is rational, we can not get the conclusion that our office-supply department will become the most profitable component of our stores, because the prices may be the most important aspects in the payoff. Although increasing the stock may be reduced the average price of the supplies, it also increases the hazard of the cost. The increasing sales may be offset by partly deficit of the stock pressure. To sum up, appropriate price and stock may be helpful for profit, no increasing the stock all along.

In summary, the conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and misleading. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer should present more facts to prove that the survey can rightly support the argument. To solidify the argument, the arguer would produce concrete evidence that it is the only influencing aspects of the sales in Valu-Mart stores and the prices and the increasing stock condition of the store will be suitable for profit.