In the first place, the management assumes that the increase in total sales was due to the addition of the pharmacy section. However, the only evidence offered to support this conclusion is the fact that the addition of the pharmacy preceded the increase in sales. But the mere fact that the pharmacy section was added before the increase occurred is insufficient grounds to conclude that it was responsible for the increase. Many other factors could bring about this same result. Lacking a detailed analysis of the source of the sales increase, it would be sheer folly to attribute the increase to the addition of the pharmacy section.
In the second place, even if it were the case that the increase in total sales was due to the addition of the pharmacy section, this fact alone is insufficient to support the claim that adding additional departments will increase sales even further. It is quite possible that the addition of the pharmacy section increased sales simply because there was no other pharmacy in the vicinity. The additional proposed departments and services, on the other hand, might be well represented in the area and their addition might have no impact whatsoever on the profits of the store. In other words, there may be relevant differences between the pharmacy section and the additional proposed sections that preclude them from having a similar effect on the sales of the store.
In conclusion, the managements argument is not well-reasoned. To strengthen the conclusion, the management must provide additional evidence linking the addition of the pharmacy section to the increase in total sales. It must also show that there are no exceptional reasons for the sales increase due to the pharmacy section that would not apply to the other proposed additions.
【GMAT考试:Argument写作范文二十二】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02