The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods:
"Over time, the costs of processing 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 Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyse the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The annual report of Olympic Foods claims to stockholders that the cost of the products with maximum profits is completely misleading and is definitely not satisfactory. It has tried to convince its stockholders that its soon to be 25 year old frozen food processing company, Olympic Foods, will rise with more profits and reduced costs. Even though, the report stated may well have a merit, but due to lack of poorly and weak reasoned argument, we cannot accept this argument as valid.
The primary issue is that the report has correlated the cost of processing of its food product with the cost of processing color film. Color film is a non-perishable item and it can be stored for indefinite amount of time whereas frozen food is a perishable item and can be stored for a small amount of time. Hence, costs associated with the former and later are completely different. We can compare both things. Moreover, the costs of color film have been analysed from 1970 to 1984. There is high probability that costs from 1984 to 2012 has increased due to increase in technology and mass media. Hence, this assumption for the arguments cannot be accepted.
In addition, the annual report does not consider the case of the certain cost factors such as electricity, transportation, packaging, machinery, labour, import of materials if any, government duties and taxes, etc. The cost factors mentioned in the preceding statement increase or decrease every year and are completely dependent on world economics. Hence, it is difficult to control and have a stable hold on the product price. Moreover, Olympic Foods will fail to keep maximum profits, if its competitors are selling the same product and services as offered by Olympic Foods at a much lower price. The annual report, therefore, weakens the argument by making assumptions and failing to explicate various issues.
There is another major flaw made by annual report in its statement is that since Olympic Foods will soon be a 25 year old company hence, its longer stay in the market will instigate minimize costs with maximum profits. We have seen a more than 100 year old company such as Lehman Brothers that suddenly got bankrupt. Hence, it is difficult to make such kind of future claim. Moreover, if its home country goes in crisis just like the present case of Greece, Olympic Foods will be forced to increase it price. Thus, the author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion as unacceptable.
While the report does have several key issues in its argument's premises and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The report could have given the reason of its improved technology and reduced labour as the reason for decrease cost to its stockholders. It could have suggested more factors such as its high quality of frozen foods and its quantum increase of loyal customers thus making it believe that Olympic Foods have a good share in the market. This would also help in having a competitive edge against its competitors. The annual report could have given the assumption though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification; he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the annual report's illogical statement is based on unsupported premises and lot of assumptions that render its conclusion as invalid. It has overlooked the above addressed points. If the annual report truly hopes to change its stockholders' minds on the issue, it would have to largely restructure its argument, fix the flaws in its logic, clearly explicate its assumptions, and provide more convincing and evidentiary support. Without, these things its poorly and weakly reasoned argument will likely to convince and last only few stockholders.
"Over time, the costs of processing 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 Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyse the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The annual report of Olympic Foods claims to stockholders that the cost of the products with maximum profits is completely misleading and is definitely not satisfactory. It has tried to convince its stockholders that its soon to be 25 year old frozen food processing company, Olympic Foods, will rise with more profits and reduced costs. Even though, the report stated may well have a merit, but due to lack of poorly and weak reasoned argument, we cannot accept this argument as valid.
The primary issue is that the report has correlated the cost of processing of its food product with the cost of processing color film. Color film is a non-perishable item and it can be stored for indefinite amount of time whereas frozen food is a perishable item and can be stored for a small amount of time. Hence, costs associated with the former and later are completely different. We can compare both things. Moreover, the costs of color film have been analysed from 1970 to 1984. There is high probability that costs from 1984 to 2012 has increased due to increase in technology and mass media. Hence, this assumption for the arguments cannot be accepted.
In addition, the annual report does not consider the case of the certain cost factors such as electricity, transportation, packaging, machinery, labour, import of materials if any, government duties and taxes, etc. The cost factors mentioned in the preceding statement increase or decrease every year and are completely dependent on world economics. Hence, it is difficult to control and have a stable hold on the product price. Moreover, Olympic Foods will fail to keep maximum profits, if its competitors are selling the same product and services as offered by Olympic Foods at a much lower price. The annual report, therefore, weakens the argument by making assumptions and failing to explicate various issues.
There is another major flaw made by annual report in its statement is that since Olympic Foods will soon be a 25 year old company hence, its longer stay in the market will instigate minimize costs with maximum profits. We have seen a more than 100 year old company such as Lehman Brothers that suddenly got bankrupt. Hence, it is difficult to make such kind of future claim. Moreover, if its home country goes in crisis just like the present case of Greece, Olympic Foods will be forced to increase it price. Thus, the author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion as unacceptable.
While the report does have several key issues in its argument's premises and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The report could have given the reason of its improved technology and reduced labour as the reason for decrease cost to its stockholders. It could have suggested more factors such as its high quality of frozen foods and its quantum increase of loyal customers thus making it believe that Olympic Foods have a good share in the market. This would also help in having a competitive edge against its competitors. The annual report could have given the assumption though there are several issues with the author's reasoning at present, with research and clarification; he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the annual report's illogical statement is based on unsupported premises and lot of assumptions that render its conclusion as invalid. It has overlooked the above addressed points. If the annual report truly hopes to change its stockholders' minds on the issue, it would have to largely restructure its argument, fix the flaws in its logic, clearly explicate its assumptions, and provide more convincing and evidentiary support. Without, these things its poorly and weakly reasoned argument will likely to convince and last only few stockholders.
