GMAT考試不僅考查申請人的語言能力和數學能力，還要測試其頭腦反應、邏輯思維和解決實際問題的能力。一般來說，GMAT考試可以比較真實地反映應試者的英語水平，因而受到越來越多的專業和學校的重視和好評。下面是yjbys網小編提供給大家關於2015年GMAT作文機經彙總，希望對大家有所幫助。
篇一：航空公司減少航線
本月原始
某airline company(P打頭)，某報告說過去一年原油價格上漲，而P公司呢他們還expand its operation(新開了一些航線)，P公司經理了profit的decline，通過我們的分析，發現原油價格上漲對行業影響是普遍的，而某些公司卻報告了盈利增加，對比P公司和盈利增加的公司，唯一的區別就是P新開了航線，因此，新開航線影響了P公司的盈利，如果要提升利潤，我們recommend remove掉去年新開的航線
考古
V1. 說一個航空公司的去年profit下降了，然後說因爲兩個原因：1.去年油價上升了。2.去年增加了一些飛機。但是呢，別個航空公司都面臨油價上升，但profit增加了，所以導致該航空公司profit下降的原因一定就是飛機的數量增加了。所以爲了今年要增加profit，就減少飛機數量。
V2. 一個航空公司分析師給 ceo 的 email。說 Provincia last year profits decline，oil price 正好增長，所以該公司的 expenditure for fuel 增加了，同時該公司去年 add more flights 因爲其他 airlines 也經歷了油價上漲，但是甚至 increase profit 所以 P 公司虧損的`原因一定是 more flights。爲了利潤，應該 eliminate flighs
V3.作文是email.一個航空公司的利潤fell over 20%說的是航油價上漲和新買5架飛機導致的，since航油大家(airline)都在漲，所以兩個原因中一定有一個是利潤下降的原因，那就是買飛機導致利潤下降
參考思路：
1. 充分必要條件：flight expansion 是 profit 減少的唯一條件?也有可能是乘客減少，
2. 錯誤類比：其他公司 increase their profitability 不一定就是減少number of flight，也許是他們的服務更好，顧客更喜歡選擇他們公司;或是
3. 無根據假設：Decrease flight expansion一定會使 profit上升?雖然減少航班數量，可以減少overall cost，但是 revenue from these flights 也是同樣減少。
篇二：Park Hill商業計劃
本月原始
就是在park hill區的披薩店、電影院和高爾夫俱樂部過去兩年發展很好，所以XX公司今年應該投資另外一個區的另外三家店，並且採取消費兩家店可以獲得第三家折扣的措施，可以讓每個店都獲利並且最大化回報
考古原題
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 over the past two years. Capital Idea should therefore 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."
參考思路
1. 錯誤類比：PH地區與I地區不同，在PH地區成功的business在I地區不一定成功，人口，habit等不同。
2. 因果關係：即使這三種business會成功，那麼這特定的三家店也不一定能成功，還要看該店的經營、銷售、服務等等。
3. 無根據假設：即使捆綁三個店，顧客也不一定會每個店都去消費。
it除了與銷售量有關，與成本也有關，不能單純因爲去的人可能增加就認爲profit會增加，還要考慮成本、折扣等等。
參考範文
The argument states that if by motivating customers to patronize all three Businesses of Capital Investment, the profitability of each business will increase and maximize return for Capital achieve this the firm proposes to initiate a program where if a customer patronizes two of the Businesses , he will receive substantial discount on the third. However there are several assumptions that the argument is based on for which it does not give sufficient evidence.
Firstly, The argument assumes that people will not otherwise go to all the three places if they go to the two places. There is no evidence to support this assumption. For example, certain demographic groups may enjoy watching theatre, playing golf and may like to eat out as well frequently. They may not select two out of the three. So by giving them heavy discount on something that they would have anyways chosen may actually negatively impact the profits.
Secondly, the argument gives the example of the success of the three businesses in the Park Hall district. However it does not clearly state the reasons behind the success of the businesses there. It appears that Capital Idea selected these businesses to invest specifically for the unique combination which they found to be successful in Park Hill district. If this is the case then the three businesses are complementary to one another and hence they will succeed as a group. So there seems no reason to explicitly ask customer to patronize the three at the cost of a discount.
In conclusion the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons. It can be strengthened if more evidence is given to substantiate why the proposed program would work. Without these the argument remains unconvincing and open to debate.
