GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文五-查字典英语网
搜索1
所在位置: 查字典英语网 >留学英语 > GMAT > GMAT写作 > GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文五

GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文五

发布时间:2016-03-02  编辑:查字典英语网小编

  63. According to this newspaper article, the Cumquat Cafe made a mistake by

  relocating one year ago. The author supports this claim by pointing out that Cumquat is

  doing about the same volume of business as before it moved, while RoboWrench

  plumbing supply outlet, which took over Cumquats old location, is apparently doing

  better because its owners plan to open a new outlet in a nearby city. This argument

  suffers from several critical flaws.

  To begin with, the two businesses are too dissimilar for meaningful comparison.

  Cumquats old location may simply have been better suited to hardware, plumbing, and

  home improvement businesses than to cafes and restaurants. The articles claim that

  Cumquat made a mistake in moving fails to take this possibility into account.

  Secondly, the articles claim that RoboWrench is doing better since it took over

  Cumquats old location is too vague to be meaningful. The author fails to provide a

  second term of this comparison. We are not informed whether RoboWrench is doing

  better than before it moved, better than other plumbing stores, or better than Cumquat.

  This uninformative comparison is worthless as evidence from which to judge the

  wisdom of Cumquats decision to relocate.

  Thirdly, the claim that RoboWrench is doing better is unwarranted by the

  evidence. The mere fact that RoboWrench plans to open a new store in a nearby city

  does not by itself establish that business is good. It is possible that the purpose of this

  plan is to compensate for lackluster business at the current location. Or perhaps the

  RoboWrench owners are simply exercising poor business judgment.

  Finally, the claim that Cumquat made a mistake in moving may be too hasty, since

  the conclusion is based on only one years business at the new location. Moreover,

  given the time it ordinarily takes for a business to develop a new customer base in a new

  location, the fact that Cumquats volume of business is about the same as before it

  moved tends to show that the move was a good decision, not a mistake.

  In conclusion, the claim that Cumquats move was a mistake is ill-founded, since

  it is based on both poor and incomplete comparisons as welt as on a premature

  conclusion. To better assess the argument, we need to know what the author is

  comparing RoboWrenchs performance to; we also need more information about the

  extent of RoboWrenchs success at this location and why its owners are opening a new

  

点击显示

推荐文章
猜你喜欢
附近的人在看
推荐阅读
拓展阅读
  • 大家都在看
  • 小编推荐
  • 猜你喜欢
  •