The following appeared as a memorandum from the vice-president of the Dolci candy company:
“Given the success of our premium and most expensive line of chocolate candies in a recent taste test and the consequent increase in sales, we should shift our business focus to producing additional lines of premium candy rather than our lower-priced, ordinary candies. When the current economic boom ends and consumers can no longer buy major luxury items, such as cars, they will still want to indulge in small luxuries, such as expensive candies.”
The author concludes that Dolci candy company can attain the goal of high profits if it adjusts its product lines by adding premium candy. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the recent achievement in sales of the most expensive products of the company. Furthermore, the impending recession would benefit the sales of expensive candies because people cannot buy other luxury items anymore. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author's questionable assumptions, illogical causality and weak analogy.
Most conspicuously, the author only concerns with a convoluted new product line issue as a single step change in increased profits yet ignores many relevant factors. The company's profitability is determined by the whole bunch of business environment, national economy, politics, competitiveness, and so on. Sometimes, brand awareness also plays a pivotal role. It can be reasonably assumed that Dolci candy company still cannot earn satisfied benefits because of many reasons. Therefore, only one step adjustment by adding new product lines is incomplete.
Also, it is senseless to conclude that since the expensive chocolate candies are lucrative, the premium products could do well even further. Possibly, the chocolate candies of Dolci candy company are successful because of specific reasons, such as effective advertising strategy, attractive candy packages. The author does not guarantee that the new products which Dolci candy company would like to sell also comprise these advantages.
Finally, the author foresees the increased profits on the specious assumption that after the economic boom ends, the consumers would save more money by turning to small yet luxurious items. Actually, this assumption is not necessarily valid. It is possible that even if the consumers experience the financial difficulties, they still prefer to spend their money on such essential items as cars, golden accessories, housing, and so on because they oversee that these items are a lucrative investment, and would yield high profits to them, especially during such financial crisis. Hence, they would save money by not purchasing trivial stuff such as candies. If this is the case, then the author's argument is greatly weakened.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional corroborate that merely the new additional premium products are sufficient to boost the sales of Dolci candy company. In addition, the missing relationship between the new product lines and the recent taste test should also be given. Most importantly, the author has to prove that if connoisseur consumers do not buy the major luxury items, they will buy the premium candies otherwise. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
“Given the success of our premium and most expensive line of chocolate candies in a recent taste test and the consequent increase in sales, we should shift our business focus to producing additional lines of premium candy rather than our lower-priced, ordinary candies. When the current economic boom ends and consumers can no longer buy major luxury items, such as cars, they will still want to indulge in small luxuries, such as expensive candies.”
The author concludes that Dolci candy company can attain the goal of high profits if it adjusts its product lines by adding premium candy. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the recent achievement in sales of the most expensive products of the company. Furthermore, the impending recession would benefit the sales of expensive candies because people cannot buy other luxury items anymore. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author's questionable assumptions, illogical causality and weak analogy.
Most conspicuously, the author only concerns with a convoluted new product line issue as a single step change in increased profits yet ignores many relevant factors. The company's profitability is determined by the whole bunch of business environment, national economy, politics, competitiveness, and so on. Sometimes, brand awareness also plays a pivotal role. It can be reasonably assumed that Dolci candy company still cannot earn satisfied benefits because of many reasons. Therefore, only one step adjustment by adding new product lines is incomplete.
Also, it is senseless to conclude that since the expensive chocolate candies are lucrative, the premium products could do well even further. Possibly, the chocolate candies of Dolci candy company are successful because of specific reasons, such as effective advertising strategy, attractive candy packages. The author does not guarantee that the new products which Dolci candy company would like to sell also comprise these advantages.
Finally, the author foresees the increased profits on the specious assumption that after the economic boom ends, the consumers would save more money by turning to small yet luxurious items. Actually, this assumption is not necessarily valid. It is possible that even if the consumers experience the financial difficulties, they still prefer to spend their money on such essential items as cars, golden accessories, housing, and so on because they oversee that these items are a lucrative investment, and would yield high profits to them, especially during such financial crisis. Hence, they would save money by not purchasing trivial stuff such as candies. If this is the case, then the author's argument is greatly weakened.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional corroborate that merely the new additional premium products are sufficient to boost the sales of Dolci candy company. In addition, the missing relationship between the new product lines and the recent taste test should also be given. Most importantly, the author has to prove that if connoisseur consumers do not buy the major luxury items, they will buy the premium candies otherwise. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
