The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Carlo’s Clothing to the staff:
“Since Disc Depot, the music store on the next block, began a new radio advertising campaign last year, its business has grown dramatically, as evidenced by the large increase in foot traffic into the store. While the Disc Depot’s owners have apparently become wealthy enough to retire, profits at Carlo’s Clothing have remained stagnant for the past three years. In order to boost our sales and profits, we should therefore switch from newspaper advertising to frequent radio advertisements like those for Disc Depot.”
The author concludes that Carlo’s Clothing can certainly increase its profitability by changing the media of advertisement from via newspaper to via radio. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the achievement of the music store in the close vicinity, Disc Depot, whose business has expanded greatly after issuing a new radio advertising last year. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author’s questionable assumptions, illogical causality and weak analogy.
Most conspicuously, this argument is based on the flawed assumption that the customers of Carlo’s Clothing and those of Disc Depot have access to the same media. In fact, this is a dubious claim because both of them virtually do not tune into the same media. Perhaps, the customers of Disc Depot also hear the advertising campaign from other sources, in addition to radio advertising, such as television, the Internet, music events, and so on. Furthermore, the author does not define the type of radio station which Disc Depot used to promote its name. The radio station may entirely emphasize on music. If this is the case, then the advertisement of clothing store may not successfully attract the audiences.
Also, the author only concerns with a brand awareness issue as a single step change in profitability yet ignores many relevant factors. Actually, when people would like to buy clothes, they do not buy only because of the familiarity with the brand. The design of clothing, pricing and competitiveness are also important for the buyers’ decisions. Service quality of the staff sometimes also plays a pivotal role. It can be reasonably assumed that currently Carlo’s Clothing suffers from a low profitability because of various reasons. Hence, only one step adjustment in advertising campaign without considering other influential factors is incomplete.
Finally, the author foresees the increased profits on the specious analogy between Carlo’s Clothing and Disc Depot. No evidence does the author use to support this assumption. Apparently, Disc Depot can enjoy its satisfactory because the owners have tremendous and versatile skills in management. In contrast, the author does not guarantee that Carlo’s Clothing can do the same. Possibly, Carlo’s Clothing cannot do anything, and may not have potential to do so. Without such evidence, the expectation of increased sales and profits is unfounded.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen this argument, the author would have to provide additional evidences that the prospective customers of Carlo’s Clothing also listen to the radio as same as those of Disc Depot. Furthermore, the author has to prove that only the adjustment of advertising strategy would definitely lead to the increased profits. Most importantly, the missing connection between clothing industry and music industry should be given. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
“Since Disc Depot, the music store on the next block, began a new radio advertising campaign last year, its business has grown dramatically, as evidenced by the large increase in foot traffic into the store. While the Disc Depot’s owners have apparently become wealthy enough to retire, profits at Carlo’s Clothing have remained stagnant for the past three years. In order to boost our sales and profits, we should therefore switch from newspaper advertising to frequent radio advertisements like those for Disc Depot.”
The author concludes that Carlo’s Clothing can certainly increase its profitability by changing the media of advertisement from via newspaper to via radio. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the achievement of the music store in the close vicinity, Disc Depot, whose business has expanded greatly after issuing a new radio advertising last year. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author’s questionable assumptions, illogical causality and weak analogy.
Most conspicuously, this argument is based on the flawed assumption that the customers of Carlo’s Clothing and those of Disc Depot have access to the same media. In fact, this is a dubious claim because both of them virtually do not tune into the same media. Perhaps, the customers of Disc Depot also hear the advertising campaign from other sources, in addition to radio advertising, such as television, the Internet, music events, and so on. Furthermore, the author does not define the type of radio station which Disc Depot used to promote its name. The radio station may entirely emphasize on music. If this is the case, then the advertisement of clothing store may not successfully attract the audiences.
Also, the author only concerns with a brand awareness issue as a single step change in profitability yet ignores many relevant factors. Actually, when people would like to buy clothes, they do not buy only because of the familiarity with the brand. The design of clothing, pricing and competitiveness are also important for the buyers’ decisions. Service quality of the staff sometimes also plays a pivotal role. It can be reasonably assumed that currently Carlo’s Clothing suffers from a low profitability because of various reasons. Hence, only one step adjustment in advertising campaign without considering other influential factors is incomplete.
Finally, the author foresees the increased profits on the specious analogy between Carlo’s Clothing and Disc Depot. No evidence does the author use to support this assumption. Apparently, Disc Depot can enjoy its satisfactory because the owners have tremendous and versatile skills in management. In contrast, the author does not guarantee that Carlo’s Clothing can do the same. Possibly, Carlo’s Clothing cannot do anything, and may not have potential to do so. Without such evidence, the expectation of increased sales and profits is unfounded.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen this argument, the author would have to provide additional evidences that the prospective customers of Carlo’s Clothing also listen to the radio as same as those of Disc Depot. Furthermore, the author has to prove that only the adjustment of advertising strategy would definitely lead to the increased profits. Most importantly, the missing connection between clothing industry and music industry should be given. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
