GMAT作文范文及解析：杂货店销售运营
The following is part of a business plan created by the management of the Megamart grocery store.
“Our total sales have increased this year by 20 percent since we added a pharmacy section to our grocery store. Clearly, the customer’s main concern is the convenience afforded by one-stop shopping. The surest way to increase our profits over the next couple of years, therefore, is to add a clothing department along with an automotive supplies and repair shop. We should also plan to continue adding new departments and services, such as a restaurant and a garden shop, in subsequent years. Being the only store in the area that offers such a range of services will give us a competitive advantage over other local stores.”
Megamart杂货店的管理层的商务计划：
由于我们在杂货店内加了药剂部分，今年我们的总体销售额增加了20%。显然，顾客主要关注的是一次性购物的便利性。在今后两年内提高我们的利润的最佳方法是增加一个成衣部门和一个汽车配件和维修商店。我们同时也应该在最后的纪念中继续增加新的部门和服务，比如餐馆，园艺商店。成为本地唯一的提供如此广泛服务的商店将给我们带来超越其他商店的竞争优势。
1. 总体销售额增加20%利润不一定也会相应增加
2. 销售额的增加不一定是由于增加了这个部门造成的
3. 以后是否还会有如此效果不一定。因为可能已经有企业提供更专业更优质的商品和服务。
1. 没有建立因果。sequence不能证明因果。不知道收入来自哪个section. 很可能是有其他的原因：很可能是pharmacy没有利润。利润来自其他的部分。比如食品等，质量提高，或者经济情况好，人们有更多的demand。
2. 销售额增加不一定是profit增加。
3. 错误类比：就算加入了pharmacy引起了收入提高，也不能说增加的clothing和其他也会引起收入。很可能人们不是因为convenience，而是对medicine的需要。很可能其他的，人们更愿意到special shops。
The management of the Megamart grocery store concludes that adding new departments and services is the surest way to increase profits over the next couple of years. They are led to this conclusion because of a 20 percent increase in total sates, realized after the addition of a pharmacy section to the grocery store. On the basis of this experience, they concluded that the convenience of one-stop shopping was the main concern of their customers. The management’s argument is faulty in several respects.
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 management’s 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.