2. In this argument the author concludes that the Apogee Company should dose

　　down field offices and conduct all its operations from a single, centralized location

　　because the company had been more profitable in the past when all its operations were

　　in one location. For a couple of reasons, this argument is not very convincing.

　　First, the author assumes that centralization would improve profitability by cutting

　　costs and streamlining supervision of employees. This assumption is never supported

　　with any data or projections. Moreover, the assumption fails to take into account cost

　　increases and inefficiency that could result from centralization. For instance, company

　　representatives would have to travel to do business in areas formerly served by a field

　　office, creating travel costs and loss of critical time. In short, this assumption must be

　　supported with a thorough cost-benefit analysis of centralization versus other possible

　　cost-cutting and/or profit-enhancing strategies.

　　Second, the only reason offered by the author is the claim that Apogee was more

　　profitable when it had operated from a single, centralized location. But is centralization

　　the only difference relevant to greater past profitability? It is entirely possible that

【GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文八八】相关文章：

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（35）

★ GMAT写作必备句型汇总30（带译文）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（30）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（11）

★ GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文八六

★ GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文八七

★ GMAT写作范文精选：Argument例文(37)

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（3）

★ 精选GMAT写作范文50篇（48）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（28）