newGMAT����80���

For example students in non academic disciplines

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: over Cumquat’s old location is too vague to be meaningful. The author fails to provide a second term of this comparison. We are not informed whether RoboWrench is doing better than before it moved, better than other plumbing stores, or better than Cumquat. This uninformative comparison is worthless as evidence from which to judge the wisdom of Cumquat’s decision to relocate. Thirdly, the claim that RoboWrench is doing better is unwarranted by the evidence. The mere fact that RoboWrench plans to open a new store in a nearby city does not by itself establish that business is good. It is possible that the purpose of this plan is to compensate for lackluster business at the current location. Or perhaps the RoboWrench owners are simply exercising poor business judgment. Finally, the claim that Cumquat made a mistake in moving may be too hasty, since the conclusion is based on only one year’s business at thenew location. Moreover, given the time it ordinarily takes for a business to develop a new customer base in a new location, the fact that Cumquat’s volu...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 05/05/2009 for the course ECAS asdfasdf taught by Professor Asdfaf during the Spring '09 term at Academy of Art University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online