-
agarwalva
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 152
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:56 pm
- Location: New york
- Thanked: 9 times
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."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author expects to minimize cost and increase profit on processing of food based on the a generalized principle He then draws parallel between color film and food industry assumes that the same principle can be applied to other sectors as well. Though his claim may well have merit ,author presents a poorly reasoned argument which lacks evidence and leaps to make unstated assumptions.
The primary issue with the argument is with the assumption that a generalized principle which worked for a particular industry will also work in case of a speicifc Industry like food.
There is no evidence and plausible reason that such a principle will work in case of a industry which is completely different.
In addition, the author assumes that the other costs in food processing have not increased and inflation is not having a major factor. If the costs related to raw material, machinery and labour have inceased in last 25 years it will be very difficult to minimize cost to increase profits. There is no evidence as to whether these factors remained constant or have changed over time. The author assumes that demand for the frozen food is constant or has increased. If the demand has gone down the price for the product is going to take a toll which will effect the final profits realized. These assumptions and holes and arguments have rendered the argument weak and implausible.
The seconmdary issue with the argument is that the premises are stated without any substantial evidentiary suport. The argument can be made plausible with concrete evidence from similar related indusry profit gains from increased efficency. The author needs to cite evidence that the efficeny increase affects more than the other factors which might increase the price
There is no evidence as to the principle will apply to food industry. Author needs to cite evidence as to what are the changes in process and how much efficency has increased.
Though the author has viable issue at hand , the author's argument is flawed with little evidentary support and number of unstated assumptions. Author needs to restructure his argument , fix the flaws and clearly articulate the evidence that would support the argument. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument is likely to convince few people
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."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author expects to minimize cost and increase profit on processing of food based on the a generalized principle He then draws parallel between color film and food industry assumes that the same principle can be applied to other sectors as well. Though his claim may well have merit ,author presents a poorly reasoned argument which lacks evidence and leaps to make unstated assumptions.
The primary issue with the argument is with the assumption that a generalized principle which worked for a particular industry will also work in case of a speicifc Industry like food.
There is no evidence and plausible reason that such a principle will work in case of a industry which is completely different.
In addition, the author assumes that the other costs in food processing have not increased and inflation is not having a major factor. If the costs related to raw material, machinery and labour have inceased in last 25 years it will be very difficult to minimize cost to increase profits. There is no evidence as to whether these factors remained constant or have changed over time. The author assumes that demand for the frozen food is constant or has increased. If the demand has gone down the price for the product is going to take a toll which will effect the final profits realized. These assumptions and holes and arguments have rendered the argument weak and implausible.
The seconmdary issue with the argument is that the premises are stated without any substantial evidentiary suport. The argument can be made plausible with concrete evidence from similar related indusry profit gains from increased efficency. The author needs to cite evidence that the efficeny increase affects more than the other factors which might increase the price
There is no evidence as to the principle will apply to food industry. Author needs to cite evidence as to what are the changes in process and how much efficency has increased.
Though the author has viable issue at hand , the author's argument is flawed with little evidentary support and number of unstated assumptions. Author needs to restructure his argument , fix the flaws and clearly articulate the evidence that would support the argument. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument is likely to convince few people
