2015年2月13日GMAT考试刚刚完成了新一轮题库更换，新东方网GMAT频道第一时间为各位考生整理了2015年3月GMAT作文机经之为增加利润与咖啡品牌合作并裁员，供考生们参考使用，希望对各位备考能有帮助。

　　想让机经来得更猛烈些？请戳>>2015年3月GMAT作文机经汇总

　　为增加利润与咖啡品牌合作并裁员

　　本月原始：

　　作文：一个叫Greenberg的公司最近业绩增长不佳，它的客户主要消费奢侈品，为了节约成本，要裁员10人，减少displays和free samples，并且surveys显示一个C某某的 Cafe和Greenberg的大部分客户是同一类型，所以也打算设置cafe corner(?)然后说这样一定能增加profit

　　考古：

　　应该是原题。

　　Greetree Grocers has been experiencing high sales volume but decreasing profit margin. Its customers are wealthy people looking for gourmet food and luxury shopping experience, so it must cut costs without hurting the customers' shopping experience. So it plans to layoff 10 employees per store and eliminate expensive displays and free samples. In addition, it will partner with XX Cafe to have a coffee shop in each store. This is supported by a recent survey that the Grocers and the Cafe attract similar types of customers. The conclusion is that Greentree Grocers will experience high sales volume as well as high profit margin.

　　参考思路：

　　1.错误假设:(1).作者忽略裁员和减少试用的负面影响，如服务质量下降，顾客满足感下降，以及员工本身负责的顾客也可能因为员工的解雇而流失。

　　(2).开了咖啡店就能增加收入，不一定——收入成本分析。 很可能 咖啡店带来的收入弥补不了咖啡店的成本。开咖啡店需要占用更大面积而且雇佣更多员工。

　　2. 因果关系-忽略他因:margin降低不一定是因为员工多展品多。影响margin 的因素有很多，如果原材料成本上升很快，裁员也是杯水车薪。

　　参考范文:

　　In the argument, the author concludes that Greentree Grocers will experience high sales volume as well as high profit margin by laying off employees,

　　eliminating expensive displays and free samples and partnering with XX Cafe

　　to equip each store with a coffee shop. To support the argument, the author

　　claims that this proposal can help cut costs without hurting the customers’

　　shopping experience. In addition, the author cites a recent survey which shows that the Grocers and the Cafe attract similar types of customers. At the first glance, the author’s argument appears somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that it suffers from several logical flaws.

　　In the first place, the author commits the fallacy of “Gratuitous Assumption”.

　　The author unfairly assumes that these changes can help cut costs without bring about other influences. However, the author fails to consider the negative effects of laying off people and eliminating expensive displays and free

　　samples. It is possible that customers may feel less contented because fewer clerks and displays reduce the luxury shopping experience, in turn causing a fall in sales.Thus, it is impossible to conclude that these changes will meet the expected goals.

　　In the second place, the author commits again the fallacy of “Gratuitous

　　Assumption”. The argument rests on the ill-founded assumption that equipping each grocer with a coffee shop is sure to bring up more sales.However, it is not necessarily the case. Without providing a detailed cost-benefit analysis, the author can’t justify that the partnership with XX Cafe is going to work.

　　It is possible that the partnership would cost the Greentree Grocers so much money that the sales from the coffee shop can’t offset because more areas and more employees are required.

　　In the third place, the author commits the fallacy of “Causal Oversimplification”.The author uses the positive correlation between the margin and the number of employees and displays to establish causality.However, the fact that these two things coincides with each other does not necessarily mean that the latter causes the former.The reasoning is fallacious unless other causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, the increasing cost of the material cost may account for the decreasing margin. Under this circumstance, laying off people and eliminating displays are just “A drop in a Bucket”.

　　In the fourth place, the survey is too vague to be informative.The author fails to mention in the argument who conducted the survey, who responded and when, where, how the survey was conducted.Lacking the information about the number of people surveyed and the number of respondents, it is impossible for us to access the validity of the result.For example, if only 10 people responded to the survey, the result of the survey is far from useful.Unless these questions are answered, the result of the survey is worthless as evidence of the argument.

　　In conclusion, the argument is logically flawed for the above reasons. To

　　substantiate the argument, the author should provide more information and

　　evidence to figure out the exact reasons for the decreasing margin. Also, the author needs more information to conclude that the partnership with XX Cafe will meet its goal. In addition, possibilities that would undermine this

　　argument should be considered and eliminated.

　　想让机经来得更猛烈些？请戳>>2015年3月GMAT作文机经汇总

　　更多精彩内容尽在新东方网GMAT频道，同时也可关注我们的微信平台（微信号：newgmat）

(微信号：newgmat)

(编辑：马荟)