第一篇AA,求助大家多提负面意见，我好改正

第一篇AA，搞了2小时，我看别人发的第一篇作文都很牛，我第一次写不来那种水平，希望有人多提提负面的评价供我参考，谢谢了~

1. The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods.

“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”

The report asserts a prediction that the company will minimize its costs and thus maximize

profits. In an attempt to make the assertion more sound and persuasive, the author cites an

example of the decreased cost of a 3-by-5-inch print in color film processing industry which

he/she believes to be analogizable to the food processing industry. In addition, the report

declares that the company's 25 years history will enable it to effectively cut the costs.

However, the argument is logically flawed since it cites an inappropriate example, contains

gaps in its line of reasoning and is based on awkward assumptions.

First, the example cited by the argument even paradoxically indicates an increased price of

the 3-by-5-inch print, since 50 cents for five-day service is equivalent to 10 cents for

one-day service, which is less than 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. Besides, the

argument simply assumes that the changed price of a single product in color film processing

industry can indicate a trend of food processing industry, without demonstrating the

relationship between these two industries. How if the two industries share more differences

than similarities so that they are virtually irrelevant.

Second, the argument is based on an awkward assumption that a business will become more

efficient over time. The argument fails to cite evidence to support this assumption, for

instance, to provide statistics which indicate that older companies are generally more

efficient than younger companies. Furthermore, the company age alone is not sufficient to

reveal the ability of a company to minimize the costs. Therefore, the argument here

overlooks critical factors of improving efficiency other than age. In sum, it is

unreasonable to reach the conclusion that the company will successfully minimize costs and

thus maximize profits, based on the limited information provided in this argument.

Suffering from those logical flaws, the argument is unwarranted and not convincing. To

strengthen the argument, the author has better use a more appropriate example which can be

applicable to the food processing industry, provide the link between the age and efficiency

of a company, and rule out other factors that influence the efficiency.