GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文七

　　65. In this memorandum, the vice president of Road Food suggests that the company

　　motivate its advertising agency to perform better by basing the agencys pay on the

　　Road Foods profits. In support of this suggestion, the vice president points out that

　　although Road Food initially thought the ad agency was following company

　　recommendations, competitor-Street Eats earned higher profits last year. The vice

　　president also notes that Street Eats has fewer restaurants than Road Food, and that

　　Road Food spent nearly as much money on advertising as Street Eats did. This

　　argument is unconvincing, since it relies on dubious assumptions and comparisons.

　　First, the vice president assumes that the ad campaign caused the low profits.

　　However, the vice president ignores many other factors that contribute to profitability.

　　In particular, the fact that Road Food has been spending less advertising money per

　　restaurant than Street Eats suggests that its unwillingness to spend more may be the

　　main reason for disappointing profits.

　　Second, the author implies that the ad agency failed to implement Road Foods

　　guidelines, and that this failure was the reason for disappointing profits. However, it is

　　equally possible that the ad agency faithfully followed all suggestions from Road Food,

　　and that those suggestions were the cause of the disappointing profits. In this respect,

　　the author unfairly shifts blame from Road Food to the ad agency.

　　Third, the authors comparison between Road Food and Street Eats is less relevant

　　than a comparison between Road Foods own profits prior to its latest ad campaign and

　　its profits during this campaign. Comparing its own profits during these time periods

　　would more accurately reflect the ad agencys effectiveness than comparing profits of

　　two different companies.

　　Finally, the author assumes that the ad agency will be more motivated if its fee is

　　based on Road Food profits. However, the author does not support this claim. In fact,

　　given that Road Foods profits have been lower than expected, it is just as likely that the

　　ad agency would be less motivated by the suggested fee structure than by some other

　　fee structure.

　　In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the vice

　　president must provide evidence that the ad campaign caused last years disappointing

　　profits, and must examine and rule out other factors that may have contributed to

　　disappointing profits.