argument124 vivien 3.31

vivien3773UID：2308910

Argument124

In this memo, the manager of National Daily News (NDN)conclude that for the purpose of expanding the home delivery service of this newspaper, NDN should paymore attention to the state of Urba (U), but not the state of Sylva. Themanager cites three evidences to justify this conclusion. As discussed bellow,these three evidences suffers from several critical flaws and the conclusionbased on them is unconvincing.

First of all, the mere fact that the residents of S is morewidely dispersed is insufficient
to draw the assertion that the profit per customer is low.The author overlooks the possibility that a large amount of residents of Ssubscibe the newspaper of NDN that NDN can gain much profit in S. Or perhapsthe price of newspaper in S is higher than U so NDN can sell its newspaper in ahigher price which resulted in more profit. Without accounting these factors,the author should not conclude that because of the residents' widelydispersion, the profit of each customer is low.


Second, the author fails to provide more reliable evidencesto make us believe the study he cited to support his conclusion. It is possiblethat only 10 residents of S engaged in this study, Or a large amount ofresidents joined in this study but only 10 percent of  them responded to this study. Then the result of the study cannot represent the whole residents' opinion. Even the  result is reliable, it is unreasonable to infer the resident'staste of reading newspaper from their taste of watching TV. The author fails toruling out the possibility that the residents of S like reading national newseven they did not like watching national TV programs.

Finally, the author falsely infer that U's residents willinterested in NDN from the
fact that many news in NDN is about the state of U. Here theauthor assume that residents
like reading local news more than news about other place.But the author provides no evidence to demonstrate this assumption. Commonsense telling us that sometimes
people concern news about other places which is strangeto  them. If the residents of U moreconcerned news about other areas, the author's expectation that U'sresidents  will be more interested inreading NDN's newspaper is false.

In summary, the conclusion reached in this argument is notwell supported. To make this memo more persuasive, the author need to providemore concrete evidences to demonstrate that the profit of selling NDN'snewspaper in S is low and NDN can sell more newspaper in U and gain more profitthere.