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.
错了。。看了一些回答结合自己的理解:
C说大多数捐款来自那些捐过的人,筹款人没有过多联系那些捐过的人。
A说筹款人对那些未捐过款的人游说的成功率,和其他学校的筹款人一样。
评级标准:好的筹款人游说未捐款的人去扩大基金
对未捐款的人游说的成功率,A直接说了。
C只反映小部分钱来自之前未捐款的人,这个和筹款人是否游说了,以及游说的成功率无关。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论