GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文二六

　　86. In this argument the author reasons that the failure of Company B portends a

　　similar fate for Company A. The grounds for this prediction are similarities that exist

　　between the two companies. The line of reasoning is that since both companies produce

　　video-game hardware and software and both enjoy a large share of the market for these

　　products, the failure of one is a reliable predictor of the failure of the other. This

　　argument is unconvincing.

　　The major problem with the argument is that the stated similarities between

　　Company A and B are insufficient to support the conclusion that Company A will suffer

　　a fats similar to Company Bs. In fact, the similarities stated are irrelevant to that

　　conclusion. Company B did not fail because of its market share or because of the

　　general type of product it produced; it failed because children became bored with its

　　particular line of products. Consequently, the mere fact that Company A holds a large

　　share of the video-game hardware and software market does not support the claim that

　　Company A will also fail.

　　An additional problem with the argument is that there might be relevant

　　differences between Company A and Company B, which further undermine the

　　conclusion. For example, Company As line of products may differ from Company Bs

　　in that children do not become bored with them. Another possible difference is that

　　Company Bs share of the market may have been entirely domestic whereas Company

　　A has a large share of the international market.

　　In conclusion this is a weak argument. To strengthen the conclusion the author

　　would have to show that there are sufficient relevant similarities between Company A

　　and Company B as well as no relevant differences between them.