My Prompt: "Over time, the costs of prcessing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since the Olympics Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expec that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs thus maximize profits."


My Analysis for the prompt is below


The argument states that process efficiency cost improves over time, and uses the film industry as an example for it's reinforcement. The statement argues that process improvement efficiency would also apply Olympic Foods business. Based on the prompt, their argument process improvement efficiency is not valid. The argument is not valid because, it compares two different to a different industries, and the time span of 14 was used as an example that would apply to the 25 years of operation to the business operations.
The argument assumes that the food company can improve because their 25th anniversary is being celebrated soon. The prompt does not state what time period Olympic Foods going to improve their process, what year the company is celebrating it's birthday, and uses a snapshot of time to compare to operation life of a business. There is no specific time period the reader would know when the food company is operating, so that means I don't know if they are dealing with the same inflation or taxes. Even though the reader knows when the company is celebrating their 25 years of operations, we aren't given the date to be able to make the connection for the two time periods. The use of comparing a snapshot of time to life of business operations is substantial, because there is no beginning or end. The time span also weakens the argument by trying to use an industry time span to compare to years of operation of a company.
They prompt uses two different industries to support their weak statement. Olympic food operates in the food industry, and the prompt uses the film industry. The film industry does not account for cost of food or processing the food like Olympic Food does into their operations.
Finally, this is one business being compared to an entire different industry as well. That piece background knowledge the reader will weaken the prompt as well. It reinforces that the two time frames are not going to be making a connection because it is attempting to connect a industry standard to one company life of operation. It also adds more support to the two different industries counter, because the prompt is not just comparing two different industries, but an industry to a one different business.