argument 38 95 96

桌子上的梨 · 发表于 2012-8-3 13:01:53

argument 38 95 96

The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian, a company that manufactures men's clothing.

"Five years ago, at a time when we had difficulty obtaining reliable supplies of high-quality wool fabric, we discontinued production of our popular alpaca overcoat. Now that we have a new fabric supplier, we should resume production. Given the outcry from our customers when we discontinued this product and the fact that none of our competitors offers a comparable product, we can expect pent-up consumer demand for our alpaca coats. This demand and the overall increase in clothing prices will make Sartorian's alpaca overcoats more profitable than ever before."

In the memo, the author recommended Sartorian to resume alpaca overcoats supply. To bolster this argument, the author cites that five years ago they discontinue production of their popular alpaca overcoat because of unreliable material supply, but now they have a new fabric supplier. Basis on this line of evidences, he reasons that their once popular alpaca overcoats will hit in the market and they can be more profitable than ever before. Granted that it seems to be somewhat appealing, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the author assumes the alpaca overcoats marketing are the same with five years ago, so their come-back production can be a big selling. However, it is widely acknowledged that the taste of the public especially when it comes to such vogue cases as overcoats shifts quicker than anyone can imagine. Yesterday’s hot issue may well be in today’s landfill. Maybe there is no custom in favor of the alpaca overcoats any more. The fact that competitor stopped making alpaca coats may just indicate declining consumer demand for them. Or maybe, after five years' alpaca vacancy, the consumer tastes and habits have become so well entrenched in other kind of coats that consumers would not be glad to change.

Also, other factors may change during the past five years. The vice president presumes that S has the same position in alpaca overcoats marketing as five years ago. However, the author provides no evidence that this is the case. It is quite possible that five years ago S has some special brand advantage that today they do not have - and that it cannot duplicate any more. After all, consumers are very easy to forget.

Furthermore, the manager assumes that a new fabric supplier is both necessary and sufficient for this purpose, yet the manager has not provided any evidence to substantiate either assumption. First, the author fails to substantiate the assumption that the new fabric supplier will be a reliable supplier of alpaca, and fails to provide any information about the quality of the fabric they supply. He also didn't introduce the price of the new fabric. Perhaps, the quality they provided are not so match with S's demand, after all, S needs high-quality products. Or perhaps the cost is so high that they can hardly make a profit.

Admittedly, profitability is a function of both revenue and expense. Without ruling out these possible scenarios, the vice president cannot convince me that the new fabric supplier is a sufficient reason to resume the alpaca’s production.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it the argument's author must show--perhaps by way of a reliable citywide study--that consumers of different backgrounds are all eager to buy alpaca overcoats. The author would also bolster the argument by providing reliable evidence that S still hit in alpaca overcoats market. Finally, to better assess the argument I would need to know more details about the new fabric supplier.

提纲：

1.作者assume五年后的市场与五年前的一样，消费者的爱好、潮流都没有改变。事实上，时尚是很快会褪色的，明日黄花蝶也愁。现在市场上已经没有别家在销售这些东西了，本身可能就是一个市场改变的强烈信号。

2.五年前S可能是一个品牌优势明显的公司，现在就未必了，因为消费者是健忘的。

3.利润是有关成本与收益的，现在还不能确定一定会大卖，更何况作者对于新的原材料没有说明，有可能这家质量很差，有可能原料涨价很多，导致公司营收甚至可能很难打平。

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-8-3 20:05:36

第二个质疑点，我感觉略微写的简单了些，不够specific

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-8-3 20:06:24

Admittedly, profitability is a function of both revenue and expense. Without ruling out these possible scenarios, the vice president cannot convince me that the new fabric supplier is a sufficient reason to resume the alpaca’s production.这一段独立成段，我觉得不太好

桌子上的梨 · 发表于 2012-8-5 19:48:35

argument 38 95 96

The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian, a company that manufactures men's clothing.

"Five years ago, at a time when we had difficulty obtaining reliable supplies of high-quality wool fabric, we discontinued production of our popular alpaca overcoat. Now that we have a new fabric supplier, we should resume production. Given the outcry from our customers when we discontinued this product and the fact that none of our competitors offers a comparable product, we can expect pent-up consumer demand for our alpaca coats. This demand and the overall increase in clothing prices will make Sartorian's alpaca overcoats more profitable than ever before."

In the memo, the author recommended Sartorian to resume alpaca overcoats supply. To bolster this argument, the author cites that five years ago they discontinue production of their popular alpaca overcoat because of unreliable material supply, but now they have a new fabric supplier. Basis on this line of evidences, he reasons that their once popular alpaca overcoats will hit in the market and they can be more profitable than ever before. Granted that it seems to be somewhat appealing, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the author assumes the alpaca overcoats marketing are the same with five years ago, so their come-back production can be a big selling. However, it is widely acknowledged that the taste of the public especially when it comes to such vogue cases as overcoats shifts quicker than anyone can imagine. Yesterday’s hot issue may well be in today’s landfill. Maybe there is no custom in favor of the alpaca overcoats any more. The fact that competitor stopped making alpaca coats may just indicate declining consumer demand for them. Or maybe, other clothing manufactures have been filled the market void by producing similar coats，after five years cultivation, the consumer tastes and habits have become so well entrenched in other kind of coats that consumers would not be glad to change.

Also, other factors may change during the past five years. The vice president presumes that S has the same position in alpaca overcoats marketing as five years ago. However, the author provides no evidence that this is the case. It is quite possible that five years ago S has some special brand advantage that today they do not have - and that it cannot duplicate any more. After all, consumers are very easy to forget. Also, the fact that clothing prices have been steadily increasing for five years implies that consumers might have less disposable income for purchasing expensive clothes such as alpaca coats, especially if consumers’ income has not keep pace with escalating prices. Unless the arguer can demonstrate that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely, the deduction is open to doubt.

Furthermore, the manager assumes that a new fabric supplier is both necessary and sufficient for this purpose, yet the manager has not provided any evidence to substantiate either assumption. First, the author fails to substantiate the assumption that the new fabric supplier will be a reliable supplier of alpaca, and fails to provide any information about the quality of the fabric they supply. He also didn't introduce the price of the new fabric. Perhaps, the quality they provided are not so match with S's demand, after all, S needs high-quality products. Admittedly, profitability is a function of both revenue and expense. Or perhaps the cost is so high as to preclude any profit from alpaca coat sales. Since the memo provides no evidence that S will continue to be profitable in other respects, it is impossible to evaluate the reliability of the results or to make an informed recommendation.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it the argument's author must show--perhaps by way of a reliable citywide study--that consumers of different backgrounds are all eager and able to buy alpaca overcoats. The author would also bolster the argument by providing reliable evidence that S still hit in alpaca overcoats market. Finally, to better assess the argument I would need to know more details about the new fabric supplier.

提纲：

1.作者assume五年后的市场与五年前的一样，消费者的爱好、潮流都没有改变。事实上，时尚是很快会褪色的，明日黄花蝶也愁。现在市场上已经没有别家在销售这些东西了，本身可能就是一个市场改变的强烈信号。

2.五年前S可能是一个品牌优势明显的公司，现在就未必了，因为消费者是健忘的。就算消费者仍然愿意买单，也可能近年通货膨胀物价飞涨，普通人的购买力下降，alpaca这种比较奢侈的东西难以保证销路。

3.利润是有关成本与收益的，现在还不能确定一定会大卖，更何况作者对于新的原材料没有说明，有可能这家质量很差，有可能原料涨价很多，导致公司营收甚至可能很难打平。作者也没有提供该公司其他品类的盈利信息，所以赚钱的结论很难做出。

[作文互改] argument 38 95 96

argument 38 95 96 revised 这个版本还OK吗？

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块