“The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it — even though that amount is far more than any other person involved with the movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to work in several films that were very financially successful.”
--------------------
Author concludes that paying a star, Robin Good, several million dollars to act in the movie 3003 will result in an increase in profits. The line of reasoning is based on the past success of those movies in which Robin Good has starred. Author assumes that an actor will prove successful if he had been a part of successful films in the past. The argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
Firstly, author doesn't provide any information about the type of acting Robin Good is most suited for. It is possible that Robin Good is good at action oriented roles and his past movies were action based stories and thus were a big hit. In that case, if 3003 is a romantic movie, and Robin God is very poor in acting romantic episodes, then 3003 would be a disaster at box offices. There is no necessary information to agree with author's conclusion.
Secondly, author assumes that if Robin Good acts in this movie then profits will increase. There are several factors behind success of any movie such as having a good story, good actors, high production quality etc. Though Robin Good acts in the movie but if it has a weak story to excite crowd then the movie might fail. Weighing the success or failure of the movie on the performance of a single actor would be unwise without considering other factors.
Furthermore, without considering other alternatives such as casting a cheaper but a good actor but raising the production quality or having a better director etc., the decision to pay Robin Good several million dollars might not be a feasible option to the producers. It might lead to a business failure to producers.
Author should have considered all possible alternatives for increasing the revenues from the movie, he should have studied what kind of movies Robin Good has acted, what kind of roles he is good at and what genre of the movie is 3003 etc., before arriving at the conclusion that paying Robin Good huge sums is the only option left to increase profits.
In whole, the argument is based on the information from past which might not prove relevant to present circumstances, lacks the information about the type of movie 3003 is, acting talent of Robin Good and his past movies. It fails to convince author's point that paying Robin Good several million dollars is a good choice to increase profits for 3003.
--------------------
Author concludes that paying a star, Robin Good, several million dollars to act in the movie 3003 will result in an increase in profits. The line of reasoning is based on the past success of those movies in which Robin Good has starred. Author assumes that an actor will prove successful if he had been a part of successful films in the past. The argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
Firstly, author doesn't provide any information about the type of acting Robin Good is most suited for. It is possible that Robin Good is good at action oriented roles and his past movies were action based stories and thus were a big hit. In that case, if 3003 is a romantic movie, and Robin God is very poor in acting romantic episodes, then 3003 would be a disaster at box offices. There is no necessary information to agree with author's conclusion.
Secondly, author assumes that if Robin Good acts in this movie then profits will increase. There are several factors behind success of any movie such as having a good story, good actors, high production quality etc. Though Robin Good acts in the movie but if it has a weak story to excite crowd then the movie might fail. Weighing the success or failure of the movie on the performance of a single actor would be unwise without considering other factors.
Furthermore, without considering other alternatives such as casting a cheaper but a good actor but raising the production quality or having a better director etc., the decision to pay Robin Good several million dollars might not be a feasible option to the producers. It might lead to a business failure to producers.
Author should have considered all possible alternatives for increasing the revenues from the movie, he should have studied what kind of movies Robin Good has acted, what kind of roles he is good at and what genre of the movie is 3003 etc., before arriving at the conclusion that paying Robin Good huge sums is the only option left to increase profits.
In whole, the argument is based on the information from past which might not prove relevant to present circumstances, lacks the information about the type of movie 3003 is, acting talent of Robin Good and his past movies. It fails to convince author's point that paying Robin Good several million dollars is a good choice to increase profits for 3003.
