Smithtown University’s fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort. Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument? - Smithtown University’s fund-raisers were successful in their
contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people. - This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown
University from new donors when the university’s fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before. - This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown
University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university’s fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors. - The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in
getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before. - More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University’s
fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.
这个题目有点没看明白, 请牛牛翻译下, 然后给下思路, 谢谢 |