AA001 Olympic Food 我的处女作，大家批评 --修改标题 by Zeros

---        In this argument, the arguer concludes that the long experience of Olympic Food make it almost definitely for Olympic Food to minimize costs and thus maximize profits. To support this conclusion, the arguer makes an anology between color film processing industry and the food processing industry. In addition, the arguer points out that the same principle also applies to the processing of food and thus draws the conclusion above.

         At first glance, the arguer's argument appears to be some what convincing and exciting, but further reflection reveals that some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate the argument.

        In the first place, the anology in the argument seems to be justified. however,  this anology alone does not necessary suggest that something happend in a industry will also happen in another industry. To substantiate the argument, the arguer need to make a comparison between both industries and especially drill deep down about the similarity between these two industries.

In the second place, the arguer mentioned that the long experience Olympic Foods got in its development will also enable it to get more profits by minimizing costs. One should be cautious to draw such a conclusion because there is no necessary relationship between a company's history and its ability to maximize profits. Everyday we may know from new paper, TV program and some other mediaries that lot of companies are losing their profit margin although they have long history in their industries, and that numerious companies are becoming more and more profitable nevertheless they are new entrant in their industries.

          In coclusion, the author fails to provide adequate justification for the argument. As it stand, the reasoning does not constitute a logical argument iin favor of the conclusion. To better assess the argument, we need additional detailed information, such as to what extent the similarities between film processing and food processing industries are.

MM把题号放在第一层楼的标题里吧，这样大家也能够很快地搜到这张贴子了。：）

感觉正文3段，总字数400-500会更好。

MM不妨参看一下置顶精华贴里前辈的论述。

我不是NN,不过还是厚脸皮的品品吧....

首先,文章的格式不对,每段开头不要空格,直接写,每段之间空一行

其次,开头段相对的太长,最多只能占全文的三分之一

再次,第一段你要指出具体的为什么两个industry不能够相比,比方说,腐坏,运输成本在胶卷方面都不成问题,但是在食品加工上就成了不可克服的困难等等的

再次,第二段里Everyday we may know from new paper, TV program and some other mediaries that lot of companies are losing their profit margin although they have long history in their industries, and that numerious companies are becoming more and more profitable nevertheless they are new entrant in their industries. 这个反驳的不好,要针对原题的东东去反驳,而且你这里只是举了一个符合你的观点的句子,并没有说它指出错误的原因.

还有就是AA最好要写三段才行

BTW,你有的拼错了analogy, necessarily "this anology alone does not necessary suggest"

because there is no necessary relationship between a company's history and its ability to maximize profits最好改成causal,因为AA强调逻辑关系这些词要用专业的术语

其实这个AA的问题还有几个,(1)25年的经验不一定是长的,因为没有同业的比较,可能其他的食品公司都是30年以上的.(2)common sence说长期经验会降低成本什么的可能不适用于这个企业,因为她可能是垄断企业,没动力去改进(3)即使长期会降低成本,也不意味着可以maximum利润.因为其他competitors可能降价,或者搞一些promotion campaign,使得OF的销量降低,所以利润甚至可能降低(利润=单个利润*销量) (4)注意这是给股东的年报,所以可能不具有真实性,因为有vested interest

谢谢大家！！！

我好好改，第一次写，没有太大感觉，只有靠慢慢琢磨了