- 最后登录
- 2011-5-25
- 在线时间
- 3 小时
- 寄托币
- 219
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2007-6-11
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 126
- UID
- 2348819

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 219
- 注册时间
- 2007-6-11
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 1
|
TOPIC: ARGUMENT147 - The following appeared in an editorial in a business magazine.
"Although the sales of Whirlwind video games have declined over the past two years, a recent survey of video-game players suggests that this sales trend is about to be reversed. The survey asked video-game players what features they thought were most important in a video game. According to the survey, players prefer games that provide lifelike graphics, which require the most up-to-date computers. Whirlwind has just introduced several such games with an extensive advertising campaign directed at people 10 to 25 years old, the age-group most likely to play video games. It follows, then, that the sales of Whirlwind video games are likely to increase dramatically in the next few months."
WORDS: 424 DATE: 2007-12-8 17:46:52
[outline]:
1.调查可性度值得怀疑,没有指出是如何进行的,且依据调查问的问题没有能找出价格下降的原因.
2.忽略的许多可能导致前两年价格下降的原因,如质量不如其他人或者领导的失误__广告策略使用有问题
3.尽管新游戏吸引了10-25岁的玩者,新产品的价格是否能够令他们接受.产品价格是否有优势.
4.时间不太短,不能够很快看出销售量的增长.
The letter points out that Walnut Grove's town council's advocation-switching from EZ Disposal to ABC Waste-based on that EE raised its monthly fee but ABC did not using EE.To justify this statement,the arguer offers three reasons.One is EE collects trash once more than ABC,which collects only once.Another one is EE ordered sdditional trucks.And the last one is because of EE's exceptional service.It seems logical,but this letter is flawed b three obvious respects.
First of all,the fact that EE collects trash twice a week which ABC collects once provides no evidence that EE id the better choice than ABC.Perhaps EE collect rubbish twice a week because of its low efficiency.Or perhaps because the trash from the areas where EE manages is much more that those from ABC managed areas,EE has no choice but to collect twice a week.Or perhaps the citizens require EE to do so,for they are comfortable in a clean environment.Without ruling out these possibilities,the arguer cannot convice me that EE is better than ABC.
On the other hand,the fact that EE currently has ordered additional trucks cannot obviously support this argument.The additional trucks,otherwise,indicate the lower efficiency of EE than ABC's.The possibility for ordering more than 20 trucks is that the volume of EE's trucks are smaller than ABC's,or even that the quality is not so good.So they need to do so.Or perhaps just because of the additional trucks'fee,EE raises its mongthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month.What's more,the fact that ABC just orders a fleet of 20trucks cannot unfairly be treated that it provises bad service.However,it indicates its high efficiency.This argument is unconvinced without offering the reak reason why EE orders additional trucks and proving that 20 trucks is not insufficient.
Lastly,the last year's town survey that 80% respondents were 'satisfied' with EE's performance in sufficiently convinces me that EE provides exceptional service .Because we are told nothing about the way this survey was conducted and how well it represented the public opinions.Maybe these respondants are only the EE's customers,then they cannot compare EE's service with the other company's,such as ABC.Hence,this just only indicates that they are content with EE's service,but accomplishes that EE's service id beeter than other's.Or perhaps people who take this survey are satisfied with EE's service.The result of the survey is incomplete to be conclusive.
In sum,this letter is unconvinced as it stands.The reasoning behind choosing EE seems logical as presented above.However,before any final decision are made that which company should we choose the citizens should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for EE as compares to ABC.
[ 本帖最后由 grace040802 于 2007-12-12 01:13 编辑 ] |
|