argument 41第一次写，求拍

swansunxyUID: 2765967

41The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food-distribution company with food-storage warehouses in several cities.

"Recently we signed a contract with The Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to provide pest-control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff Company for all our pest-control services."



By comparing the different result of last month’s service provided by The Fly-Away Pest-Control Company and The
Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, the arguer concludes that the best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff company for all the company’s pest-control service, even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower. Because the warehouse in Wintervale where the the Buzzoff Pest-Control Company provided their service last month is relatively better protected. This conclusion seems to be sound and convincing at first glance, after all, it is the purpose of the company to decrease the food destroyed by pest damage. However, I’m afraid that this conclusion can hardly bear further consideration because it suffers from several critical flaws.

One seemingly overwhelming advantage of Buzzoff Pest-Control Company (B Company) over Fly-away Pest-Control Company (F Company) is that the service of the former leads to only $10000 worth of the food stored destroyed by pest damage while the latter, however, twice amount of the worth of the money. The arguer lays such emphasis on it that gives us the impression that B Company offers better service, and thus they should choose B Company for all their pest-control services. However, the arguer fails to convince us by citing any convictive evidence that the two warehouses in different places can be comparable at every aspect. The difference between the two warehouses is highly possible to bring about different result. For instance, may be Palm City was suffering a serious pest damage during last month while the temperature of Wintervale was extremely low, under which condition pest damage could hardly occur. Without any further information about the two warehouses, we can not hastily conclude that the service of B Company is better.

Although the author argues that the service of B Company is better, we still can not come to the conclusion that turning to B Company for all pest-control services is the best way to save money. Because the arguer does not inform us about the actual price charged by each company, thus we can not evaluate the actual cost of turning to each company. If the price of B Company is $10000 or more more expensive than that of F Company, it will perhaps be relatively low to adopt F Company. It’s absurd to take a relatively expensive way as the best means of saving money.

In sum, it’s unwise to return to B Company for all pest –control services. In order to find out the most money saving way, the arguer needs to get a second consideration with rational analysis, comparison and evaluation.