【Flyer小组习作】argument15--6.28

MaryWongUID: 2619999

Argument15
In this newsletter the author recommends selling the shares of Old Dairy and suggesting that it is unwise to purchase stock in this firm. To justify this conclusion the arguer notes that Old Dairy Industries produce many food products high in fat and cholesterol. He also cites a survey on the desire of respondents in choosing food and many food stores are abundant of low-fat products. However, the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.
First of all, the author does not indicate that the sales and profits would decrease both for the high-fat food products they sell. No clear evidence here shows us the principle and company plan for future of Old Dairy. It is very likely that according to the recent trend in market, Old Dairy attempt to develop an entirely new way to attract customers. Perhaps the new series of products will sell better and bring more profits than ever.
Secondly, the evidence that there are adequate low-fat products full of many food stores can not provide any support to the arguer's infer that Old Dairy's sales would be diminished since the lack of basic introduction of the content of the products in all stores concerned. Perhaps Old Dairy only sell products as its name but other stores sell candy and pastry which would not overlap with each other.
Third, turn our attention to the survey the arguer cited. Since the article fails to offer any information of the survey's scale, the age and health situation of the respondents, and the principle
of making the statistic analysis, no one could decide the validity of the data. Perhaps the small amounts of respondents who join to the survey here are just belonging to the crowd who must keep away from fat and cholesterol. For that matter, perhaps the other 20% people left are always the best and the largest proportion of clienteles of Old Dairy, thus without offering the high-fat products may lose their majority customer.
Finally, lacking the evidence that Old Dairy is of not any value in investment could never persuade anyone that one should not buy the share of Old Dairy. It is entirely possible that the innovation in Old Dairy could make a big win relying on its great reputation before.
In conclusion, the argument is logically flawed. The arguer does not demonstrate the compelling reason why Old Dairy should sell its shares and no one should invest in it any more. Only if the author provide the valid evidence which show that Old Dairy has no possibility to explore new in healthy food and assure that most of customers will be lost due to the high-fat products, he can not convince me that Old Dairy’s destiny of failure and the shares of the company possess no value.

candygegeUID: 2792059

Argument15
In this newsletter the author recommends selling the shares of Old Dairy and suggesting that it is unwise to purchase stock in this firm. To justify this conclusion the arguer notes that Old Dairy Industries produce many food products high in fat and cholesterol. He also cites a survey on the desire of respondents in choosing food and many food stores are abundant of low-fat products. However, the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.
First of all, the author does not indicate that the sales and profits would decrease both for the high-fat food products they sell. No clear evidence here shows us the principle and company plan for future of Old Dairy. It is very likely that according to the recent trend in market, Old Dairy attempt to develop an entirely new way to attract customers. Perhaps the new series of products will sell better and bring more profits than ever.（你默认他们的HIGH-FAT FOOD销量和收益都减小了）
Secondly, the evidence that there are adequate low-fat products full of many food stores can not provide any support to the arguer's infer that Old Dairy's sales would be diminished since the lack of basic introduction of the content of the products in all stores concerned. Perhaps Old Dairy only sell products as its name but other stores sell candy and pastry which would not overlap with each other. （这段没有看明白，not overlap？）
Third, turn our attention to the survey the arguer cited. Since the article fails to offer any information of the survey's scale, the age and health situation of the respondents, and the principle
of making the statistic analysis, no one could decide the validity of the data. Perhaps the small amounts of respondents who join to the survey here are just belonging to the crowd who must keep away from fat and cholesterol. For that matter, perhaps the other 20% people left are always the best and the largest proportion of clienteles of Old Dairy, thus without offering the high-fat products may lose their majority customer.（感觉针对调查这段可以再说的具体些，不单单是罗列可能的纰漏，而且举出例子具体说明下。）
Finally, lacking the evidence that Old Dairy is of not any value in investment could never persuade anyone that one should not buy the share of Old Dairy. It is entirely possible that the innovation in Old Dairy could make a big win relying on its great reputation before.
In conclusion, the argument is logically flawed. The arguer does not demonstrate the compelling reason why Old Dairy should sell its shares and no one should invest in it any more. Only if the author provide the valid evidence which show that Old Dairy has no possibility to explore new in healthy food and assure that most of customers will be lost due to the high-fat products, he can not convince me that Old Dairy’s destiny of failure and the shares of the company possess no value.

全文主要从四点展开论述，其中两点都用的是相似的理由：OLD DIARY可能会生产新的产品。但是，推出这一论点的前提似乎是你已经morning了他们现有的销量和收益都减小了。我认为说服力不够。
至于结构和语言，我和你有一样的困惑，就是目前都还比较依赖模版，不知道应该如何把握。