- UID
- 494608
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2009-12-8
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
这个是我写的第2篇文章，我觉得好像太长了，字数都超过600了， 实际上我也用了快1个小时完成。=.= 字数太多有时候都看乱了。。。
The following appeared as part of the business plan of the Capital Idea investment firm.
“Across town in the Park Hill district, the Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf Club have all had business increases within the past two years. Capital Idea should therefore invest in the Roxy Playhouse, the Slice-o’-Pizza, and the Divot Golf Club, three new businesses in the Irongate district. As a condition, we should require them to participate in a special program: Any customer who patronizes two of the businesses will receive a substantial discount at the third. By motivating customers to patronize all three, we will thus contribute to the profitability of each and maximize our return.”
Capital Idea投资公司的商业计划：
在ParkHill区的Thespian剧院，Pizzazz比萨，Niblick高尔夫俱乐部在过去2年都有业务增长。因此Capital Idea应该投资Poxy剧场，Slic－o比萨和Divot高尔夫俱乐部这3家新的Irongate区的企业。为使他们达到条件，我们应该要求他们参加特殊的项目：任何顾客在其中两家消费将在第三家得到折扣。通过刺激顾客在所有3家店消费，我们将增进每一家的利润，从而使我们的回报最大化。
In this argument, the author recommends that Capital Idea should invest in the Roxy Playhouse, the Slice-o’-Pizza, and the Divot Golf Club, three new businesses in the Irongate district because he expects they will maximize its profits. To support this, the author first points out that in the Park Hill district, the similar businesses such as the Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf club have their sales increased within the past two years. In addition, the author reasons that these three businesses’ participation in a special program will lead to the profitability of each business and profit maximization. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but close inspection reveal that the recommendation contains several critical logic flaws.
Firstly, the author’s reasoning assumes that background condition of these three businesses in the Park Hill district will remain unchanged in any time or in any places. However, it is not clear in the argument whether the current or future condition of such these kinds of business is the same as it used to be. For example, such factors as unfavorable economic climate and poor management will influence the whole business, including these three businesses in the Park Hill district. Failure to consider such possibility may lead to an ungrounded conclusion.
Secondly, the author assumes that the company will achieve its goal by requiring the three new businesses to participate in a special program that any customer who patronizes two of the businesses will receive a substantial discount at the third. While participation in a special program may be an important contributing factor to the profitability of each business and optimal interest, it is not necessarily the only one. Some other factors other than participation in a special program should be considered to make this conclusion. For instance, improving the company’s image and the management as well as cutting the unnecessary costs may just as likely contribute to the profitability of each business and the maximum profits. It would be hasty and irresponsible to jump into the conclusion that in a special program is solely responsible for the profitability of each business and the maximum profits without considering other potential factor and circumstances.
Finally, the author assumes that business in the Park Hill district is analogous to business in the Irongate district. This assumption is probably weak, because the discrepancy between these two scenarios clearly outweighs the similarities. For example, the Park Hill district is a residential area, which can gather many residents to consume there while the Irongate district is an industrial area or an area far from residential areas, and in addition, the prospect of companies with a similar business might be poles apart by their respective management styles. Without taking into account such discrepancy, the author’s assumption is untenable.
In conclusion, this argument is not compelling as it stands. Accordingly, it is imprudent for the author to claim that Capital Idea should invest in the Roxy Playhouse, the Slice-o’-Pizza, and the Divot Golf Club, three new businesses in the Irongate district. To make this recommendation more tenable, the author would have to prove that these kinds of businesses’ background condition such as economic environment and their own management must be the same in the future. Moreover, the author has to demonstrate that there are no other potential factor and circumstances that might affect for the profitability of each business and the optimal interest. Furthermore, the author also has to show that business in the Park Hill district resembles business in the Irongate district in all aspects.Only with more concrete and convincing evidence could this argument become more thorough and better evaluated.
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2010-8-4 14:53:42
收藏
收藏
楼主
