argument209 求拍，，拍者必回

fqbtUID: 2549270

Argument 209
The following recommendation was made by the Human Resources Manager to the board of directors of the Fancy Toy Company.
"In the last three quarters of this year(1), under the leadership of our president, Pat Salvo, our profits have fallen considerably(2). Thus, we should ask for her resignation in return for a generous severance package. In Pat's place, we should appoint Rosa Winnings(6,7). Rosa is currently president of Starlight Jewelry(4), a company whose profits have increased dramatically over the past several years(3). Although we will have to pay Rosa twice the salary that Pat has been receiving, it will be well worth it because we can soon expect our profits to increase considerably(5)."
In this argument, the author advocates that Fancy Toy Company should used Rosa instead of Pat Salvo to be the president. Although I concede that it is accuracy to some extent, a logical flaw that whether there is comparability between the respective firms which Pat and Rosa taken charge of are ill-conceived. The reasons are discussed below.


In the first place, the author’s conclusion depends on this premise that the two cited companies have comparability. The primary objective of the argument is to enhance the profits of the F Company. Thus, if without this premise, all the other evidence that offered makes nonsense to support Rosa have succeed in leading S company to earn more profits during last three years. Furthermore, although these two companies may have something in common, the arguer offers no evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. From the name of two companies, we can figure out that F Company produces toy but the S firm manufactures jewelry. As we all know two companies are in completely distinctive territories. Could they have lots of things in common running their own businesses? As a matter of fact, different fields have different disciplines, which would require distinguish management philosophies of the president. In the other word, Rosa could succeed in S company doesn’t mean that she could repeat it in F company. In this sense, the arguer's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me that this scenario is unlikely to weaken this premise, which could completely reverse the rest of evidence as well as the conclusion.
Secondly, the author assumes that the fallen profits would be continuing in the future, which lacks of warranted evidence. It is very likely to be a temporary phenomenon and the trend would be reversed to high profits in the next season. Maybe last there quarters is a special period in one year, during which low sales amount is common and all the other companies come across same things as well. Perhaps in this period of time, parents are busying working and lots of students are concentrating on their school work. In this sense, the reference that the reason of falling profits is the false judgments made by Pat will be challenged.



And then, the author also argues that the money that would provide for Rose is worthy because the increasing profits would be expected soon. However, even if Rose would finish a great job in F Company as well as what he had done In S, we could never know whether her salary would amount to her work. Possibly her future job would not be valuable enough to her high salary. And some other ideal alternatives persons that could be made for taking charge of F Company are not offered. Those ideal presidents may have abilities to run F Company’s business and require low salaries. Thus, by doing these choices, not only the cost of company will decrease, but also find the right solution of its problem.


To sum up, although the author’s intention that increasing F Company’s profits is beneficial, he falsely figures out the conclusion before identifying the comparability between two firms and creates an untenable logic chain ignoring the actual reason of defeat and success of those companies. To reach the cited conclusion, the author should provide more evidence about the two firms in running their business and analysis their sales statistics of nowadays and history. After all, a wrong arrangement of presidents is concerned with the destiny of F Company.