Analysis of Argument
The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability.
The argument states that Furniture Depot's success demonstrates that using the internet advertising company's services can increase a company's profitability. Stated in this way, the argument fails to accont for key factors needed to further evaluate this conclusion. The conclusion reveals leaps of faith and flawed assumptions. The argument is therefore weak and unconvincing without further basis for the conclusion.
First, the internet advertising company says that Furniture Depot's sales increased by 10% from last year and infers that the company's profitability increased as well. However, revenues and profit are very different. The advertising company leads the reader to assume that the increase in sales naturally led to an increase in the furniture company's profitability as well. Yet, this is not always the case. For instance, sales may increase, but if costs increase by more, then overall profitability will still decrease. Furthermore, the advertising company provides no specific data regarding how much profitability increased by. Clearly, this statement is vague and open to interpretation. An increase could be a small or large amount. The argument would be better supported if a percent increase in profitability year over year was also given.
Second, the internet company assumes that because revenues increased over a one year period, that it is due to the use of internet advertising. However, correlation does not equal causation. There is no clear evidence that Furniture Depot's sales increased due to internet advertising. There could be various other reasons that the furniture company's sales increased. For example, perhaps the economy was poor in the year before so less people bought furniture, but then the economy improved the following year and consequently so did furniture purchases. On the other hand, perhaps the furniture company also decided to invest in additional advertising methods besides online, such as ads in the newspaper. Then the increase in revenues may be as a result of newspaper advertising, and not internet advertising. Clearly the argument fails to provide sufficient supporting data to relate the increase in revenues to the use of internet advertising.
Finally, the internet advertising company assumes that because Furniture Depot's sales incresed from the use of internet advertising, so too will other companies' revenue and profitiability increase from the use of internet advertising. This is a broad statement that is not supported. The strategies used to result in the success of one company does not guarantee the same strategies will be successful for another company. Every company is different and different marketing strategies work for different companies. Perhaps consumers of one type of company are more likely to buy that company's products if they see frequent online advertisements. If a company sells a product that does not fall into that category, online advertising would be useless. On the other hand, perhaps the customers of another company are people who do not spend time online. If a company is trying to advertise to these consumers, online advertisements would have little effect as their directed audience would rarely view the advertisements. The argument falsely assumes that internet advertising works for all types of companies.
In conclusion, the internet advertising company makes a number of flawed assumptions and provids little supportive evidence to make a convincing argument. The advertisement would be more convincing if it provided a broader range of examples of companies that benefited from internet advertising, more meaningful statistics regarding improvement in profitiability, as well as evidence that supports the correlation between the use of internet advertisements and the increase in sales. However, the advertisement fails to incorporate these key factors. Thus, as the argument is currently stated, it is weak, flawed, and unconvincing.
The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability.
The argument states that Furniture Depot's success demonstrates that using the internet advertising company's services can increase a company's profitability. Stated in this way, the argument fails to accont for key factors needed to further evaluate this conclusion. The conclusion reveals leaps of faith and flawed assumptions. The argument is therefore weak and unconvincing without further basis for the conclusion.
First, the internet advertising company says that Furniture Depot's sales increased by 10% from last year and infers that the company's profitability increased as well. However, revenues and profit are very different. The advertising company leads the reader to assume that the increase in sales naturally led to an increase in the furniture company's profitability as well. Yet, this is not always the case. For instance, sales may increase, but if costs increase by more, then overall profitability will still decrease. Furthermore, the advertising company provides no specific data regarding how much profitability increased by. Clearly, this statement is vague and open to interpretation. An increase could be a small or large amount. The argument would be better supported if a percent increase in profitability year over year was also given.
Second, the internet company assumes that because revenues increased over a one year period, that it is due to the use of internet advertising. However, correlation does not equal causation. There is no clear evidence that Furniture Depot's sales increased due to internet advertising. There could be various other reasons that the furniture company's sales increased. For example, perhaps the economy was poor in the year before so less people bought furniture, but then the economy improved the following year and consequently so did furniture purchases. On the other hand, perhaps the furniture company also decided to invest in additional advertising methods besides online, such as ads in the newspaper. Then the increase in revenues may be as a result of newspaper advertising, and not internet advertising. Clearly the argument fails to provide sufficient supporting data to relate the increase in revenues to the use of internet advertising.
Finally, the internet advertising company assumes that because Furniture Depot's sales incresed from the use of internet advertising, so too will other companies' revenue and profitiability increase from the use of internet advertising. This is a broad statement that is not supported. The strategies used to result in the success of one company does not guarantee the same strategies will be successful for another company. Every company is different and different marketing strategies work for different companies. Perhaps consumers of one type of company are more likely to buy that company's products if they see frequent online advertisements. If a company sells a product that does not fall into that category, online advertising would be useless. On the other hand, perhaps the customers of another company are people who do not spend time online. If a company is trying to advertise to these consumers, online advertisements would have little effect as their directed audience would rarely view the advertisements. The argument falsely assumes that internet advertising works for all types of companies.
In conclusion, the internet advertising company makes a number of flawed assumptions and provids little supportive evidence to make a convincing argument. The advertisement would be more convincing if it provided a broader range of examples of companies that benefited from internet advertising, more meaningful statistics regarding improvement in profitiability, as well as evidence that supports the correlation between the use of internet advertisements and the increase in sales. However, the advertisement fails to incorporate these key factors. Thus, as the argument is currently stated, it is weak, flawed, and unconvincing.
