Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.
Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?
Smithtown University's fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people.
This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university's fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before.
This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university's fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors.
The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before.
More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University's fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.
A选项,S学校和其他学校引进新投资者的频次一样,说明S并没有做exceptional的努力,80%的成功率是一个行业平均水平,先放着不管
B选项,今年主动联系的投资者平均投的钱,会比老投资者今年投的钱多,无关比较,因为题目并没有给出投得多=canvassing努力的逻辑关系
C选项,今年大部分老投资者都没有FR联系,说明FR联系的人基本上都是新投资者,且达到了80%的成功率,削弱观点
DE项,都是削弱观点
所以只能选A,虽然A是通过类比去增强,增强力度不是很强但只能选a...
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论