Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the tansit company's projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit expects commuters to ride the shuttle to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.'

The author believes that there is a relation between commuter use of the new subway train and commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway. But the commuter use of the subway train exceed the projected volume and whereas the commuter use of the shuttle bus is below projected numbers. Therefore, the author suggests that the number of commuters travelling by shuttle buses can be increased by either reducing the shuttle bus fares or increasing the price of parking at the subway stations.

The author's reasoning is unconvincing as it fails to consider several key factors.

Firstly, the author assumes that commuters using subway train will use the shuttle bus to reach subway station. However, there is no evidence provided by author to support this assumption. Also, it fails to consider the number of commuters walking to the subway station. Therefore, it is wrong to expect number of commuters travelling by shuttle buses to move in proportion to number of commuters travelling by subway train.

Secondly, the author does not provide any information about how the projected figures for commuter traffic on subway train and shuttle buses were derived. It is likely that the company wrongly overestimated the commuter use of the shuttle buses without doing a proper research before arriving at the projected numbers.

Another problem with the argument is that the author suggests that in order to encourage commuters to ride the shuttle to the subway rather than drive there, the company should either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations. The author assumes that the shuttle bus fares are high and they discourage the commuters to use the shuttle buses. Lacking evidence to support this view, the author suggestion cannot be taken seriously.

For the second suggestion the author assumes that all commuters either travel by shuttle or drive on their own to reach subway station. But it may be true that most of the commuters walk to the subway station. If this is true, the author's suggestion to increase the price of parking at subway station will fail to achieve the desired result.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons. The argument would have been more thorough and convincing if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts as discussed above.