Argument
"Over time,the costs of processing go down because an organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient.In color film processing,for example,the cost of a 3-by-inch print fell from 50 cents for the 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 Olympics foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.
In the argument, the author correlated experience with cost of processing and concluded that the long experience will enable its organization to minimize cost and thus maximize profits.In order to support its claims,the author provided an explanation why cost of processing goes down over time. Moreover,he provided an illustration of color film processing .However, the argument is highly flawed and unconvincing.
Firstly, the author while providing the example of color film processing assumes that cost of processing and cost for providing the service are correlated.But the author fails to provide any evidence in the argument to support this correlation.Even If some correlation exists between these two,the author made an erroneous comparison between the cost for the five-day service in 1970 to cost for one-day service in 1984.It could be the case that five-day service in 1984 is more than what it was in 1970 that would exaggerate the loop hole in author's reasoning.
Secondly, Lets assumes that color film processing cost has actually decreased but it would be wrong to assume that the processing cost fell down is due to long experience what author assumes while making his argument.The processing cost decrease could be the result of other factors such as competition from other vendors or deflation.
Thirdly, the author failed to explain why the principle that worked for color film processing will work for food processing as well.The author assumes that the same principle could be applied to food processing but never provided any evidence to evaluate this point.
Furthermore,profit is a measure of the difference between revenue generated and cost of processing.the author assumes that minimizing cost will maximizes profit but never provided any detail of the revenue generated over time.what If the revenue generated decrease over time, it is possible that the profit might not increase or may fell that would weakens the authors main point.
Finally,the conclusion that long experience will minimize cost and maximize profits could be made more persuasive and less erroneous if author has provided some more examples and some reasoning on how cost of processing and cost of service are correlated, how principle for color processing could be applied to food processing and how low cost could maximize profits.
"Over time,the costs of processing go down because an organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient.In color film processing,for example,the cost of a 3-by-inch print fell from 50 cents for the 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 Olympics foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.
In the argument, the author correlated experience with cost of processing and concluded that the long experience will enable its organization to minimize cost and thus maximize profits.In order to support its claims,the author provided an explanation why cost of processing goes down over time. Moreover,he provided an illustration of color film processing .However, the argument is highly flawed and unconvincing.
Firstly, the author while providing the example of color film processing assumes that cost of processing and cost for providing the service are correlated.But the author fails to provide any evidence in the argument to support this correlation.Even If some correlation exists between these two,the author made an erroneous comparison between the cost for the five-day service in 1970 to cost for one-day service in 1984.It could be the case that five-day service in 1984 is more than what it was in 1970 that would exaggerate the loop hole in author's reasoning.
Secondly, Lets assumes that color film processing cost has actually decreased but it would be wrong to assume that the processing cost fell down is due to long experience what author assumes while making his argument.The processing cost decrease could be the result of other factors such as competition from other vendors or deflation.
Thirdly, the author failed to explain why the principle that worked for color film processing will work for food processing as well.The author assumes that the same principle could be applied to food processing but never provided any evidence to evaluate this point.
Furthermore,profit is a measure of the difference between revenue generated and cost of processing.the author assumes that minimizing cost will maximizes profit but never provided any detail of the revenue generated over time.what If the revenue generated decrease over time, it is possible that the profit might not increase or may fell that would weakens the authors main point.
Finally,the conclusion that long experience will minimize cost and maximize profits could be made more persuasive and less erroneous if author has provided some more examples and some reasoning on how cost of processing and cost of service are correlated, how principle for color processing could be applied to food processing and how low cost could maximize profits.
