argument23 Bay City seafood

Francis07UID: 2185659

ARGUMENT23
"A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable. "

最近的销量调查显示Bay City餐馆的海鲜菜肴的消费量比过去五年增加了30％。而现在该市还没有专门经营海鲜菜的餐厅。而且，Bay
City的大多数家庭是双收入家庭，一次国家调查显示这类家庭在家做饭的数量比十年前显著减少，同时他们更关注健康饮食。因此，在Bay
City开设一家新的专营海鲜食品的餐馆将会非常受欢迎而且有利可图。

Begins:
The author tries to convince us that the construction of a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be perfectly profitable and popular by the studying of the increasing amount of seafood consumption and the assumptions that more families will choose to eat seafood out in the future in Bay City.  However, this argument is still not cogent enough to convince me because of the following fallacies.

Firstly, the author easily asserts that the construction of a seafood restaurant in Bay City will surely be profitable because more people will go to our restaurant.  However, is it really the case?  In my observation, I doubt that what if nobody come comes to our restaurant after the opening, how could our investments be back?  Although the author tried to convince us by saying that the majority of families in Bay City are double income families and a nation wide study show that such families are mostly in favor of eating out.  But these evidences are not directly pointing out that these families are going to eat sea food in our restaurant.  Maybe these families like vegetable better or, to some extreme, allergic to seafoods seafood, then our restaurant will be losing money in Bay City with no customers.

Moreover, the author gave us another factor that the consumption of seafood seemed to have increased over the past five years in hope of convincing us that more people in Bay City eat seafood now.  However, in my point of view, this is also not convincing enough because the consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants may be the visitors from other part of the country.  They might be just in favor of the local dishes in Bay City restaurants and found seafood dishes cheap here and ordered them along with the local dishes.  Or maybe they are not interested in the food in Bay City, but a new opened attractive national park here.  Therefore, the consumption of seafood in Bay City would easily decrease when the park is closed.  And it would be unnecessary to open a restaurant specialized in seafood there.

Finally, even when we could collect enough evidence to show that the people in Bay City really increased their interests in seafood dishes and will definitely eat more seafood in the future.  However, the assertion that a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be popular and profitable is still of too hasty.  People may like seafood dishes in some of the restaurants just because the chief there has tried a new type of cooking that others don't know.  Thus, opening a new seafood restaurant which could not surpass the taste of that restaurant still could not become popular.

In conclusion, the suggestion to open a new restaurant in Bay City is good.  However, we could not may the decision too soon before we get enough evidence to show that such restaurant in Bay City will truely truly become popular and profitable.  There is still more surveys waiting for us to conduct.