The following appeared as part of the business plan of the Capital Idea investment firm:

“Across town in the Park Hill district, the Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf Club have all had business increases over the past two years. Capital Idea should therefore invest in the Roxy Playhouse, the Slice-o’- Pizza, and the Divot Golf Club, three new businesses in the Irongate district. As a condition, we should require them to participate in a special program: Any customer who patronizes two of the businesses will receive a substantial discount at the third. By motivating customers to patronize all three, we will thus contribute to the profitability of each and maximize our return.”

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

While the statement makes a few good points, it fails to provide sufficient evidence to support its conclusions. The speaker seems acutely aware that Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf Club have all seen business increases over the past two years. However, it neglects to mention that Thespian Theater has seen only slight increases, while Pizzazz Pizza and the Niblick Golf Club have seen decreases. The speaker’s claim that the three new businesses in the Irongate district have spurred on business increases for the other existing businesses in the district is based solely on speculation. The speaker does not elaborate onto how requiring the customers of the three new businesses to patronize the other two businesses would benefit either the new businesses or the existing businesses. In fact, in every instance, the speaker would require the customers who patronize two of the three businesses to spend a minimum amount of money at the third. This would not help the new customers at all, since they would have already spent money at two of the three businesses, and the discounts would not compensate for the lost revenue. The speaker’s explanation that the discounts and special offers would motivate customers to visit all three businesses is questionable, since customers could simply visit two of the three locations

Furthermore, the speaker’s assumption that Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf Club have comparable customer bases is questionable. While it is entirely possible that Thespian Theater, Pizzazz Pizza, and the Niblick Golf Club are attracting the same types of customers, it is also possible that Thespian Theater is attracting wealthier customers than the other two businesses. Certainly, the customers who frequent Thespian Theater are those that can afford to pay for a dinner out, while Pizzazz Pizza and the Niblick Golf Club are more affordable for the average customer. If the new business owners are struggling to attract customers, simply offering discounts in an attempt to boost business would be ineffective. Furthermore, such discounts would harm Pizzazz Pizza and the Niblick Golf Club, since those businesses are already offering discounts. In conclusion, the statement does not provide enough evidence to support its conclusions.

Total
0
Shares
Total
0
Share