argument117 [kb9.11] 第9次作业

prophetluoUID: 2240098

The conclusion that with some changes , the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of the author's stores seems at first glance to be a convinced notion. To support the conclusion the author present a survey that over 70 percent respondents were required to take more work home with them from the workplace. In addition ,the author provide a plan including a series of measures in order to take advantage of the word-at-home trend which the author get from the survey. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

In the first place, the argument is base on a doubtful survey. Firstly, the authority of the survey need to be questioned. The competition in commerce is merciless ,any measure could be carry out if it is legal, whereas the manager of Valu-Mart simply trust this survey which might be disseminated by it's competitor, then the consequence might be a tragedy to his stores. Secondly, there is no evidence to clarify the habitats of samples and respondents in this survey . In other words , more evidence should be supplied in order to justify that the samples of the survey are random accessed and the respondents represent the people living around the Valu-mart. Thirdly, the statistical information of this survey is too vague to be informative, because if the base amount of the respondents is 10 ,70% percent of respondents are not too large to delegate the people working near the Valu-Mart.

In the second place, even if the survey was convinced and reasonable ,the increase of stock of home office machines did not have casual relationship with the raise of benefits. Firstly, it  is unwarranted to assume that the people who are required to take more work home would purchase printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and so on, until the author lend more relative information about the respondents. For example , with little known of computer science, one might hold an opinion that what programmers need is nothing but a computer with proper development software, whereas if the respondents were our programmer ,the increase of the stock would not lead to the increase of profits. Secondly, there might be a strong competor in that areas, since the office-supply department had not sold impressively in the past. In this suitation, the success of the competitor made the raise of profits doubtful.

In the third place, any further prediction should be made until the author provide more evidence that the office-supply departments would be the most profitable component. Even if we accept that there should be increase after increasing the stock of some commodities, it is unreasonable to assume that the work-at-home trend will bring enormous benefits , even the office-supply was the worst profitable component of the stores and other component would not made any progress to keep abreast with  office-supply.  

In sum, the argument suffers from several fatal fallacies. To strength the support of the conclusion , the author need to search for more detail information of the survey concerning the career , amount , habitats of the respondents. To better justify the notion ,the other components 's profits in the last year should be provided too.