I know there are flaws but this is the best I could do while watching a game simultaneously haha
thanks in advance, please let me know if you require me to return the favor
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."
Time is usually accompanied with wisdom. Wisdom allows one to be more efficient in executing various subjects from intangible to tangible.
The author of this passage states that with time, companies gain the knowledge on how to reduce their processing costs. Therefore his company is no exception and marking their 25th anniversary will see a reduction of said costs in the following year.
This is however not the case, at least based on the authors passage. While the author does bring up a valid point there are flaws which make this argument weak and therefore cannot be fully accepted as true. One such flaw is the lack of evidence to support his argument. The author claims that companies will experience a reduction of food processing costs by being more efficient as the years pass by. He then applies this logic to his own company but fails support this claim. This can be seen in not providing his companies reduction of costs over the past 25 years.
Another flaw is assuming this reduction of processing costs applies to all companies regardless of industry, economy, etc. one of the main cost of any food processing company is the food it self. The raw material needed to produce the final product. By assuming all raw materials will stay the same of any company the author is allowing a flaw to counter his argument. Raw material commodities can easily increase for company A but lower for company B. Therefore company A will see higher processing costs while B experiences lower.
The author can strengthen their argument by providing evidence to support his argument and omitting certain assumptions. One such way is by proving processing costs every five years historically of the company as to assure the trend is indeed going lower for processing costs. Another method would be to admit that not all the time will processing costs experience lower costs for various reasons but since the company is diversified in being efficient it can be negated. With these modifications the legitimacy of the argument would be strengthened
In summary, the author current argument is flawed although does introduce some valid information that when tweaked can be made into a solid claim.
thanks in advance, please let me know if you require me to return the favor
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."
Time is usually accompanied with wisdom. Wisdom allows one to be more efficient in executing various subjects from intangible to tangible.
The author of this passage states that with time, companies gain the knowledge on how to reduce their processing costs. Therefore his company is no exception and marking their 25th anniversary will see a reduction of said costs in the following year.
This is however not the case, at least based on the authors passage. While the author does bring up a valid point there are flaws which make this argument weak and therefore cannot be fully accepted as true. One such flaw is the lack of evidence to support his argument. The author claims that companies will experience a reduction of food processing costs by being more efficient as the years pass by. He then applies this logic to his own company but fails support this claim. This can be seen in not providing his companies reduction of costs over the past 25 years.
Another flaw is assuming this reduction of processing costs applies to all companies regardless of industry, economy, etc. one of the main cost of any food processing company is the food it self. The raw material needed to produce the final product. By assuming all raw materials will stay the same of any company the author is allowing a flaw to counter his argument. Raw material commodities can easily increase for company A but lower for company B. Therefore company A will see higher processing costs while B experiences lower.
The author can strengthen their argument by providing evidence to support his argument and omitting certain assumptions. One such way is by proving processing costs every five years historically of the company as to assure the trend is indeed going lower for processing costs. Another method would be to admit that not all the time will processing costs experience lower costs for various reasons but since the company is diversified in being efficient it can be negated. With these modifications the legitimacy of the argument would be strengthened
In summary, the author current argument is flawed although does introduce some valid information that when tweaked can be made into a solid claim.
