The argument seems to be attempting to establish two conclusions. First, that Fly-Away is cheaper than Buzzoff. Second, that Fly-Away is more effective than Buzzoff. The first conclusion is unsupported. Prices vary from one company to another, and prices at the two pest control companies are probably comparable. Evidence that Fly-Away is cheaper than Buzzoff would be if Fly-Away charged, say, $2,500 for pest control services while the Buzzoff charged $3,000 for them. If not, then the comparison is not meaningful, and this argument would be moot. The second conclusion, that Fly-Away is more effective than Buzzoff, is also unsupported. The pest control company representatives may have claimed that the Fly-Away method is more effective, but this statement is not backed up by any facts. In that case, quoted evidence would strengthen the argument because, at the very least, it would call the company representatives’ assertions into question.

The company representatives are in a difficult position. They probably received better pricing from Fly-Away because Fly-Away is newer, and it does not have a large advertising budget. At the same time, Fly-Away’s pest control methods are unproven. As a result, the company representatives may be reluctant to change pest control services, fearing that they will be wasting money. On the other hand, if they return to Buzzoff, they may be putting their customers’ food at risk. If Fly-Away’s methods prove to be ineffective, customers may blame the store, not Fly-Away. Therefore, this company representatives cannot simply make the statement that they are satisfied with Buzzoff. The company representatives should show evidence for their claims. If they try to justify their decision without evidence, then their argument will be weakened because they do not appear to be objective, and customers may question their competence.

If the company representatives cannot provide evidence that the Fly-Away method is superior to Buzzoff’s, then they should at least show evidence that the Fly-Away method is less expensive. If the two companies invoice for the same services, then a comparison is easy. For example, Fly-Away might charge $2,500 per month for its service while Buzzoff charges $3,000 per month. If Fly-Away charges $2,500 per month and Buzzoff charges $3,000 per month, then Fly-Away is more expensive than Buzzoff. If, on the other hand, Fly-Away charges $2,500 and Buzzoff charges $1,500 per month, then Fly-Away is less expensive than Buzzoff.

If the comparison is between two companies, then the company representatives should show an invoice or other written proof. For example, if the company representatives say that Fly-Away charged $2,500 for pest control and Buzzoff charged $4,500, then they should present an invoice from Fly-Away. If the invoice indicates that Fly-Away charged $2,500 and Buzzoff charged $4,500, then the company representatives should present an invoice from Buzzoff as well. The company representatives cannot simply say that Fly-Away charged $2,500 and Buzzoff charged $4,500 without evidence. If these two invoices are from different companies, then the company representatives should present evidence that the two companies are related, or they may even present evidence of a permanent relationship between the two companies. By showing evidence of the relationship between the two companies, the company representatives will make their case stronger because they appear to be objective.

If the company representatives cannot present invoices or other written evidence, then they should present other evidence. For example, the company representatives may claim that Fly-Away’s service is newer and Buzzoff’s service is older. If Fly-Away charges $2,500 and Buzzoff charges $5,000, then Fly-Away is newer than Buzzoff. If the Fly-Away method proves that it is less expensive than the Buzzoff method, then this comparison may be meaningful. However, the company representatives cannot simply say the newer company is less expensive without making a comparison. In that case, a comparison between Fly-Away and Buzzoff is needed. If the Fly-Away method is less expensive than Buzzoff’s, then the company representatives should present evidence that Fly-Away is less expensive. Otherwise, the argument is weak because they cannot provide any proof that the newer company is less expensive.

Finally, the vice president of the company representatives should explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. If the vice president of the company representatives explains that the Fly-Away method appears to be more effective, then this argument will be strengthened because customers’ food will not be at risk. If the vice president of the company representatives explains that the Fly-Away method is less expensive, then this argument will be strengthened because customers will not have to pay more. If the vice president of the company representatives explains that the Fly-Away method is less expensive and more effective than the Buzzoff method, then this argument will be strengthened because customers’ food will not be at risk.

If the vice president of the company representatives cannot explain how the evidence would strengthen the argument, then he or she should explain how it would weaken the argument. The vice president of the company representatives