Critical Reasoning

Mainline Airways was bought by its employees six years ago. Three years ago, Mainline hired QualiCo Advertising Agency to handle its promotions and advertising division. Today Mainline's profits are over 20 percent higher than they were five years ago and 10 percent higher than they were three years ago. Employee ownership and a good advertising agency have combined to make Mainline more profitable.
Which of the following best describes the weak point in the argument above?
(A) It fails to establish a causal connection between the change in ownership at Mainline Airways and the hiring of QualiCo, on the one hand, and the rise in Mainline's profits, on the other.
(B) It presents no evidence showing that employee-owned airlines are any more profitable than other airlines.
(C) It assumes that the profits of Mainline Airways will continue to rise.
(D) It gives no exact figures for the current profits of Mainline Airways.
(E) It fails to explain how the profits of Mainline Airways are calculated.

I have a real problem with the official answer for this quetsion. Can someone please explain how the answer is A and not B?

My justification for the reasoning for Bis:

[spoiler]The assumption is that because of employee ownership and a good advertising agency,the company today is more profitable. So we have two supposed components that have attributed to success: Employee ownership and good avertising.

Isn't it feesible to think that maybe the increase in bussiness is due solely to the advertising push and may have nothing to do with it being a company run by employees. That would undermine the conclusion.[/spoiler]

Please, advise.

(A) seems to be fine. All other choices are miles apart from the argument.

We need to focus on the conclusion. The conclusion is that employee ownership and advertising have made Mainline more profitable --> we are NOT concerned about Mainline's profits with respect to other airlines. therefore (B) is wrong.

overall, i don't think it's a good question.

What is the source?

ice_rush wrote:(A) seems to be fine. All other choices are miles apart from the argument.

We need to focus on the conclusion. The conclusion is that employee ownership and advertising have made Mainline more profitable --> we are NOT concerned about Mainline's profits with respect to other airlines. therefore (B) is wrong.

overall, i don't think it's a good question.

What is the source?

Nailed it. The argument compares Mainline today to Mainline in the past, not Mainline to other airlines.