Argument4 Kito小组作业帖 多谢修改^-^

bunnymz2005UID：2146758

【题目】
Argument4（2005年2-9月总频20次）
4.The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.

"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty and Fitch
Realty-Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In
contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams'
revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home
sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed
with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch
and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another
home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you
want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams."
**************************************************************************
【翻译】
在本市的两家最大的房地产经纪公司--Adams Realty和Fitch
Realty--之中，Adams显然更优秀一些。Adams有40名房地产经纪人，而Fitch只有25个，且很多是兼职工作。而且，Adams去年的收入是Fitch的两倍，其平均房价为$168000，而Fitch仅为$144000。在Adams销售的房屋卖得也更快：十年前，我把我的房产交给Fitch，它用了四个多月才卖出去；去年，我在Adams卖了另一处房产，仅用一个月就售出了。因此，要想让你的房产卖的更快更好，你应该选择Adams。
*************************************************************************
【提纲】
1．数量与质量是不同的。房地产经纪人的工作效率和顾客对他们的满意度呢？而且工作经验也可能不同， 可能Adams的房地产经纪人都是新手呢？工作效率低，工作没有经验，顾客满意度低。另外，作者仅仅给出Fitch的房地产经纪人多是兼职工作，但是Adams呢？也许也是兼职。因此，这两点是不能成为superior的有利证据的。
2．作者凭借年收入和平均房价认为Adams优于Fitch 同样是不合理的。年收入多不一定意味着买Adams的房产的人多，可能是因为房子所处地段比较好，或是那种高级住宅本身房价就非常高。而Fitch的房子可能地段比较偏远，是普通住宅，房价也相对较便宜。在房子不同的情况下比较房价这是没有意义的。
3．作者根据十年前房产的拍卖和去年的拍卖得出Adams销售房屋更快的结论。但问题是，作者没有考虑随着时间的变化而改变了的因素。十年前和去年，作者的房子不一样，很可能原来作者要价比较高，或者房子有毛病，比如供水有问题之类的，这样当然会卖得比较慢。而且作者没有给出同时期对方的卖出速度，跟本无法比较，可能十年前Adams需要8个月，而去年Fitch仅仅需要半个月呢？而且就算向作者假设的那样，也不代表今年也是那样。
**************************************************************************
【正文】
Prior to choosing to use Adams in order to sell home quickly and at a good price as the author presumes, I find the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. The author seems to have unduly relied on a myriad of problematic evidence and thus draw a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.

First of all, as mentioned in this argument Adams has 40 real estate agents while Fitch has 25 and many of them work only part-time. By invoking these statistics, the author tries to convince us that Adams is superior. However, common sense tells us that quantity is one thing while quality is actually another thing. For that matter, we might ask what about efficiency of their staff and whether people satisfy with them? Correspondingly, we have sufficient reasons to posit that real estate agents working for Adams were all in low efficiency and can do less work than the 25 in Fitch can do. Moreover, the author also fails to provide information about the characteristics of the jobs in Adams. Perhaps, they are also the part-time jobs as same as those in Fitch. Since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the statistics lend little support to this assumption that Adams is better.

In addition, the author illogically presume that higher revenue and average home sales price of Adams in contrast to Fitch indicate that the former is more popular with residents and thus sells more houses. However, it may not be the case. As we know, the price of house depends on several factors such as the price of the land upon which the house is built, the condition of transportation, and so forth. Accordingly, there is a good chance that it is the good land and convenient transportation of the house of Adams that lead to the higher price than Fitch. Furthermore, it is also highly possible that most of the houses sold by Adams are advanced and luxury while the house sold by Fitch may just be ordinary house for the mass. Again, this may well explain that the reason why Adams attains higher revenue than Fitch is due to the higher price. In other words, the higher revenue of Adams can be only attributed to the higher price of each house rather than the quantity of the house they sell as the author implies.

Before I come to finish my analysis, there is still another point we should focus on, that is, the example of the author oneself. As the author claims, the house he listed in  Fitch ten years ago spent four month to be sold while only one month in Adams last year. Obviously, the author fails to take into account the changing time and the different conditions of the house he sold. For one thing, there is no information about Adams ten years ago and Fitch last year. It is entirely possible that Adams needs 8 months to sell author's house ten years ago and that Fitch can cost merely half a month to sell the same house last year. For another thing, the house sold before ten years and last is likely to have conspicuous distinction. For instance, the former house may suffer from some problems, say, leakage in the water tube or remote location from downtown while the latter one may be a relatively new house. In that case, it is natural that Adams sells at a good speed which may be irrelevant to the real estate firm but because of the differences between the two houses.

To sum up, the argument is weakened by the flaws discussed above. To better evaluate it, the author should provide detailed information about Adams and Fitch ten years ago and last year. Moreover, before making a suggestion to sell or buy a house, the author should consider more carefully about the price and factors it depends on.

怎么总超时啊，郁闷ing~~~

[ 本帖最后由 bunnymz2005 于 2006-1-31 11:34 编辑 ]

智恩UID：2160717

占坐

智恩UID：2160717

提纲】
1．数量与质量是不同的。房地产经纪人的工作效率和顾客对他们的满意度呢？而且工作经验也可能不同， 可能Adams的房地产经纪人都是新手呢？工作效率低，工作没有经验，顾客满意度低。另外，作者仅仅给出Fitch的房地产经纪人多是兼职工作，但是Adams呢？也许也是兼职。因此，这两点是不能成为superior的有利证据的。
2．作者凭借年收入和平均房价认为Adams优于Fitch 同样是不合理的。年收入多不一定意味着买Adams的房产的人多，可能是因为房子所处地段比较好，或是那种高级住宅本身房价就非常高。而Fitch的房子可能地段比较偏远，是普通住宅，房价也相对较便宜。在房子不同的情况下比较房价这是没有意义的。
3．作者根据十年前房产的拍卖和去年的拍卖得出Adams销售房屋更快的结论。但问题是，作者没有考虑随着时间的变化而改变了的因素。十年前和去年，作者的房子不一样，很可能原来作者要价比较高，或者房子有毛病，比如供水有问题之类的，这样当然会卖得比较慢。而且作者没有给出同时期对方的卖出速度，跟本无法比较，可能十年前Adams需要8个月，而去年Fitch仅仅需要半个月呢？而且就算向作者假设的那样，也不代表今年也是那样。
**************************************************************************
【正文】
Prior to choosing to use Adams in order to sell home quickly and at a good price as the author presumes, I find the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. The author seems to have unduly relied on a myriad of problematic evidence and thus draw a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.

First of all, as mentioned in this argument Adams has 40 real estate agents while Fitch has 25 and many of them work only part-time. By invoking【呵呵第一次见这个词也】 these statistics, the author tries to convince us that Adams is superior. However, common sense tells us that quantity is one thing while quality is actually another thing. For that matter, we might ask what about efficiency of their staff and whether people satisfy with them? Correspondingly, we have sufficient reasons to posit that real estate agents working for Adams were all in low efficiency and can do less work than the 25 in Fitch can do. Moreover, the author also fails to provide information about the characteristics of the jobs in Adams. Perhaps, they are also the part-time jobs as same as those in Fitch. Since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the statistics lend little support to this assumption that Adams is better.【看完了这段都没找到啥可以改的，写得好好哦】

In addition, the author illogically presume that higher revenue and average home sales price of Adams in contrast to Fitch indicate that the former is more popular with residents and thus sells more houses. However, it may not be the case. As we know, the price of house depends on several factors such as the price of the land upon which the house is built, the condition of transportation, and so forth. Accordingly, there is a good chance that it is the good land and convenient transportation of the house of Adams that lead to the higher price than Fitch. Furthermore, it is also highly possible that most of the houses sold by Adams are advanced and luxury【这是名词形式哦，luxurious】 while the house sold by Fitch may just be ordinary house for the mass. Again, this may well explain that the reason why Adams attains higher revenue than Fitch is due to the higher price. In other words, the higher revenue of Adams can be only attributed to the higher price of each house rather than the quantity of the house they sell as the author implies.

Before I come to finish my analysis, there is still another point we should focus on, that is, the example of the author oneself【应该用himself或是herself吧】. As the author claims, the house he listed in  Fitch ten years ago spent four month to be sold while only one month in Adams last year. Obviously, the author fails to take into account the changing time and the different conditions of the house he sold. For one thing, there is no information about Adams ten years ago and Fitch last year. It is entirely possible that Adams needs 8 months to sell author's house ten years ago and that Fitch can cost merely half a month to sell the same house last year. For another thing, the house sold before ten years and last is likely to have conspicuous distinction. For instance, the former house may suffer from some problems, say, leakage in the water tube or remote location from downtown 【这个我没想到，学习！】while the latter one may be a relatively new house. In that case, it is natural that Adams sells at a good speed which may be irrelevant to the real estate firm but because of the differences between the two houses.

To sum up, the argument is weakened by the flaws discussed above. To better evaluate it, the author should provide detailed information about Adams and Fitch ten years ago and last year. Moreover, before making a suggestion to sell or buy a house, the author should consider more carefully about the price and factors it depends on.

写得太好了，我都没找到啥可以改的，就这么读下来了，读到哪里就觉得好像该是那句话了，如果到最后限时写出来得话至少也有5.5吧，我觉得，看了小花的作业一个字就是‘学’