GMAT考试作文机经 7月10日更新（十五）.

GMAT考试已于2012年7月10日更换题库，以下是2012年7月的GMAT作文机经更新，更新日期从12年7月11日开始，澳际留学小编会为您送上最新的机经的，希望大家多多关注本频道。在此澳际留学祝大家GMAT考试顺利!更多相关问题可咨询澳际留学在线专家，如果有任何意见和建议，也请联系我们。

　　18.

　　原始寂静：

　　V1(BY: chensixu23 ) an investment firm wants to invest in a pizza store, a theater, a music store in town A, because 3 other businesses in respect areas (namely, pizza, theater, music) in town B are making big money. Also, the investment firm plans to give discounts to customers who spend in two of the stores to use in the 3rd store.

　　原题:

　　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 therore 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.”

　　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。

　　参考思路：

　　1. 过去盈利不代表未来盈利

　　2. 已有的盈利不代表新的盈利，供过于求

　　3. 这种优惠不一定吸引顾客，因为交通、地理等因素不一定能三家同时光顾

　　19.

　　原始寂静：

　　V1(BY: foolishfatty ) 某个Airline的一个调查，只有1%不到的人对他们的baggage-landing procedures有抱怨。因此得出结论，不需要review他的流程就可以维持和增加客户。

　　原题：

　　The following appeared in an Avia Airlines departmental memorandum.

　　“On average, 9 out of every 1,000 passengers who traveled on Avia Airlines last year filed a complaint about our baggage-handling procedures. This means that although some 1 percent of our passengers were unhappy with those procedures, the overwhelming majority were quite satisfied with them; thus it would appear that a review of the procedures is not important to our goal of maintaining or increasing the number of Avia’s passengers.”

　　Avia航空的部门备忘录：

　　平均地，去年乘坐Avia的1000个乘客中有9个针对我们的行李处理流程写了投诉信。这说明虽然有大约1%的乘客对这一流程表示不满，乘客的主体对它还是满意的。所以对流程的重新审查对我们要保持和提高Avia的乘客数这一目标不是很重要的。

　　参考思路：

　　1. Gratuitous assumption：因为1%写了投诉信就假设只有1%的客人不满，就假设主体满意，不对

　　2. All things are equal:去年的调查不能代表未来

　　3. False causal relationship：因为满意度和乘客数量无因果关系，不能把这当作确定目标的因素

　　4. Either or choice:因为1%不写投诉信就说另一半是满意的不对，也有很多乘客可以表示不满意但没有写投诉信

　　参考范文：

　　The conclusion in this Avia Airlines memorandum is that a review of the airline’s baggage-handling procedures will not further its goal of maintaining or increasing the number of Avia passengers. The author’s line of reasoning is that the great majority of Avia passengers are happy with baggage handling at the airline because only one percent of passengers who traveled on Avia last year filed a complaint about Avia’s procedures. This argument is problematic in two important respects.

　　First, the argument turns on the assumption that the 99 percent of Avia passengers who did not complain were happy with the airline’s baggage-handling procedures. However, the author provides no evidence to support this assumption. The fact that, on the average, 9 out of 1000 passengers took the time and fort to formally complain indicates nothing about the experiences or attitudes of the remaining 991. It is possible that many passengers were displeased but too busy to formally complain, while others had no opinion at all. Lacking more complete information about passengers’ attitudes, we cannot assume that the great majority of passengers who did not complain were happy.

　　Secondly, in the absence of information about the number of passengers per flight and about the complaint records of competing airlines, the statistics presented in the memorandum might distort the seriousness of the problem. Given that most modern aircraft carry as many as 300 to 500 passengers, it is possible that Avia received as many as 4 or 5 complaints per flight. The author unfairly trivializes this record. Moreover, the author fails to compare Avia’s record with those of its competitors. It is possible that a particular competitor received virtually no baggage-handling complaints last year. If so, Avia’s one percent complaint rate might be significant enough to motivate customers to switch to another airline.

　　In conclusion, the author has failed to demonstrate that a review of the baggage-handling procedures at Avia Airlines is not needed to maintain or increase the number of Avia’s passengers. To strengthen the argument, the author must at the very least provide affirmative evidence that most Avia passengers last year were indeed happy with baggage-handling procedures. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the numbers of Avia passengers per flight last year and about the baggage-handling records of Avia’s competitors.

　相关链接：

1.GMAT作文点评与分析(十三)

2.GMAT考试作文机经 7月10日更新（十四）

3.怎样写好GMAT作文的开头