Advertisement has been given assuming that some people will respond to the advertisement. Hence, only Assumption II is implicit. However, Assumptions I and III are doubtful.
Consultant in his opinion emphasises the need for mobilising the staff and raising the finds. This means that the product of the company has a potential market and also that the financial b institutions provide money for such proposals.
There is a special warning in printed from to caution people against the iII effects smoking. Hence, Assumption II is implicit but I is not. Further, 'smoking is injurious to health' does not mean non-smoking promotes health. Therefore, Assumption III has no connection with the given statement. Hence, Assumption III is not implicit.
The advertisement as described in the statement is meant to influence the buyers and thus increasing sale of the television. Hence, Assumptions I and II, both are implicit.
Incentives for the punctuality and sincerity will work as a motivation force. This will definitely increase the productivity of the company. However, profitability cannot be predicted definitely as it depends on other factors.
According to the advertisement given in statement is meant to influence the buyers and thus increases sale of the television. Therefore, both Assumptions I and II are implicit.
I and II are implicit as incentive is an award for the punctuality and sincerity increase the productivity of the company. However, profitability cannot be predicted definitely as it depends on other factors.
Assumption I is invalid as it goes against the given statement. Further, without assuming II, such advertisement makes no sense. Hence, Assumption II is implicit. Assumption III again is an invalid assumption because any advertisement is given with the assumption of getting desired response and not for being ignored.
This advertisement does not make any sense without assuming Assumptions I and II. Hence, I and II are implicit. Assumption III is rubbish, it has actually no connection with the given statement. Hence, it is an invalid assumption.
The given statement tells of boom in drug business and cites examples from the capital city. This makes Assumption I a valid assumption. Again, it is given that most Jhoggi-Jhopari dwellers are seen to indulge in transactions of drug pouches. This implies that they given in to their lust for money quite easily and get involved in illegal activities for the same. Hence, Assumption III is very much valid. But Assumption II is not implicit as II has no connection with the given statement.
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.