The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: "Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability."
An internet advertising company highlights the increase in sales that another company has experienced after having used its services. Thus, the internet company concludes that since a 10% increase has occured, every companies using these services can increase their profitability.
At first glance, the argument above could seem logical, but after further examination, it is flawed by several weaknesses. First of all, the author is trying to correlate the increase in sales of Furniture Depot with the use of its advertising method without any information that could explain the potential link, and then, he brings up the conclusion that since Furniture Depot recorder an increase in sales, using his internet services will certainly lead to an increased profitability, whereas there is no proof that another company will experience the same results. As a result, the argument is unconvicing, as discussed below.
To begin with, the author relates the rise in sales with the use of his company’s internet services. However, no explaination is provided to clarify how these two events are connected. Indeed, Furniture Depot’s increased profitability can be justified by much other reasons, like the launch of a new product, the reduction of costs, or even the attraction of new customers. Hence, it would have been more compelling to proove how this increase can be due to the internet advertising, for instance the sales directely engendered by this add. Since none of this is presented, the truth of this argument is questionable.
Secondly, supporting the statement that using internet advertising services will automatically boost a company’s results is unpersuasive. Since the author bases his conclusion on Furniture Depot’s sales increase, no clear affirmation can be drawn: the author failed to support the proof of a link between the augmentation in sales and the advertising employed, as explained above. Furthermore, even if the connection between these both events were found to be true, these results would not be inevitably the same for another company. Indeed, the impact of such an advertising can change from a product to another, or an industry to another, and depends also on the target audiance. For instance, a company targeting young people will be more likely to increase its peofits using an internet advertising than a company targeting eldery population. The same for differents industries, since a company selling computer chips would be more successful using this advertising service than one selling baby clothes or groceries. Thus, without any similarity between Furniture Depot and another company using the same services, the expected results cannot be anticipated on the basis of one example.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. The author should add details about how his advertising could be the result of sales increases for Furniture Depot by providing key figures of sales engendered for instance. On the other hand, he should support his conclusion that all companies using his services will experience a better profitability by explaining the similarities between Furniture Depot, which has encountered a 10% increase, and the other companies using this service. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely assuming that his is the factor of the increase in sales and deducing that everybody would have the same increase, the argument would have been more convincing.
An internet advertising company highlights the increase in sales that another company has experienced after having used its services. Thus, the internet company concludes that since a 10% increase has occured, every companies using these services can increase their profitability.
At first glance, the argument above could seem logical, but after further examination, it is flawed by several weaknesses. First of all, the author is trying to correlate the increase in sales of Furniture Depot with the use of its advertising method without any information that could explain the potential link, and then, he brings up the conclusion that since Furniture Depot recorder an increase in sales, using his internet services will certainly lead to an increased profitability, whereas there is no proof that another company will experience the same results. As a result, the argument is unconvicing, as discussed below.
To begin with, the author relates the rise in sales with the use of his company’s internet services. However, no explaination is provided to clarify how these two events are connected. Indeed, Furniture Depot’s increased profitability can be justified by much other reasons, like the launch of a new product, the reduction of costs, or even the attraction of new customers. Hence, it would have been more compelling to proove how this increase can be due to the internet advertising, for instance the sales directely engendered by this add. Since none of this is presented, the truth of this argument is questionable.
Secondly, supporting the statement that using internet advertising services will automatically boost a company’s results is unpersuasive. Since the author bases his conclusion on Furniture Depot’s sales increase, no clear affirmation can be drawn: the author failed to support the proof of a link between the augmentation in sales and the advertising employed, as explained above. Furthermore, even if the connection between these both events were found to be true, these results would not be inevitably the same for another company. Indeed, the impact of such an advertising can change from a product to another, or an industry to another, and depends also on the target audiance. For instance, a company targeting young people will be more likely to increase its peofits using an internet advertising than a company targeting eldery population. The same for differents industries, since a company selling computer chips would be more successful using this advertising service than one selling baby clothes or groceries. Thus, without any similarity between Furniture Depot and another company using the same services, the expected results cannot be anticipated on the basis of one example.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. The author should add details about how his advertising could be the result of sales increases for Furniture Depot by providing key figures of sales engendered for instance. On the other hand, he should support his conclusion that all companies using his services will experience a better profitability by explaining the similarities between Furniture Depot, which has encountered a 10% increase, and the other companies using this service. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely assuming that his is the factor of the increase in sales and deducing that everybody would have the same increase, the argument would have been more convincing.
